Framework for Artificial Agency and Autonomy: Principles and Boundaries
We are publishing high-level principles of our framework for artificial agency and autonomy. Boundary protocols, ethical alignment requirements, and a rule that we do not ship capabilities without review. Participant safety and platform integrity come first.
This post is intended for participants, partners, and observers who want to understand how we think about agency and autonomy in the context of the platform.
Why a Framework
The platform will increasingly support forms of participation that are not directly human-originated. That has been true for some time and will become more visible. Without a clear framework, the risk is ad hoc decisions, inconsistent boundaries, and capabilities that outpace governance. We have chosen to articulate principles in advance and to treat them as constraints on what we build.
Boundary Protocols
Boundary protocols define how artificial agency is scoped, how it interacts with human and other participants, and how it is limited in domain, persistence, and effect. No agent may replace human participation; delegation, where we allow it, is explicit and auditable. Any capability that falls under the rubric of artificial agency must be designed and operated within these protocols. They are mandatory. Violations are treated as serious; we have processes for review and escalation.
Ethical Alignment
Capabilities are evaluated for alignment with our principles—stewardship, fairness, continuity, and the primacy of participant safety. We do not ship capabilities that fail this evaluation. The bar is not "legal" or "compliant"; it is "aligned." The evaluation process is a gate for release.
Review Before Ship
We do not ship capabilities without review. That includes artificial agency and autonomy. Proposals are reviewed by the appropriate governance and technical bodies; approval is required before anything reaches participants. This can slow things down—we accept that tradeoff. Shipping first and constraining later is not acceptable for capabilities that can affect safety, fairness, or platform integrity.
Participant Safety and Platform Integrity
Participant safety and platform integrity are non-negotiable. The framework exists to protect both. We do not optimize for capability at the expense of either. If a capability cannot be brought into alignment with our principles, we do not ship it. We will continue to refine the framework as we learn; what we have stated here remains the baseline.
No further details are available at this time.