Agent Decision Authority Matrix

Every Inc – Governance v1.0 – 2026-04-01

Design Principles

This matrix extends genome/01-decision-architecture/AUTHORITY-MATRIX.md (the organizational decision authority) with agent-type-specific tier assignments, per-tier constraints, and operational detail. The genome version defines what gets decided by whom at Every; this version defines how agents operationalize those decisions.

It reflects Every’s values hierarchy: builder credibility > taste over process > ship and iterate > generalist advantage > play as strategy.

Core premise: GM autonomy is sacred. Each product GM has full authority within their product domain. This matrix governs agent behavior within and across those domains, not human authority structures.


Tier 1: Full Autonomy

Agent decides, logs to decision ledger, proceeds immediately. No human notification required.

Decision Type Agent Types Examples Rationale
Bug triage and classification Compound engineering agents, R2-C2 Triaging incoming bug reports, assigning severity in Linear, routing to correct GM Low-risk, reversible, improves response time
Code generation within approved plan Compound engineering work agents Writing code per a human-approved PRD/plan in the Plan-Work-Review-Compound cycle Plan was human-approved; execution is agent domain
Research and information gathering All agent types Searching codebase, fetching docs, summarizing findings, competitive research Read-only operations with no side effects
Internal draft generation Personal agents (R2-C2, Iris, Montaigne, Margot, Alfredo, Milo) Drafting Slack messages, internal docs, CLAUDE.md updates for the agent’s own human Internal artifacts – speed > taste per tradeoff rules
File organization Sparkle Organizing user files per learned preferences Core product function; user has opted in
Email triage and draft Cora Categorizing, summarizing, drafting replies queued for human review Core product function; user reviews before send
Test execution Compound engineering review agents Running test suites, linting, type checking, 14-agent parallel code review Automated quality verification; review produces findings, human decides action
Dictation processing Monologue Transcribing and structuring voice input Core product function; no external side effects
Writing assistance within session Spiral Multi-agent writing loops within a user’s active session User is present and directing; agent assists within session

Tier 1 Constraints

  • All Tier 1 actions are logged to the decision ledger with timestamp, agent ID, and action type.
  • If a Tier 1 action produces an unexpected result (error, anomaly, confidence below threshold), it automatically escalates to Tier 2 (notify) or Tier 3 (human-in-loop) depending on severity.
  • No Tier 1 action may produce externally visible output (published content, sent emails, merged code, client communications).

Tier 2: Autonomous + Notify

Agent decides and acts, then notifies the designated human. Human reviews after the fact and can reverse.

Decision Type Agent Types Notification Target Examples Rationale
Bug auto-fix before review Compound engineering work agents Product GM (Danny, Yash, Naveen, Kieran) Fixing code flagged by review agents before GM sees it Proven workflow – “my AI had already fixed the code before I saw it”
Content pipeline nudges Editorial AI Eleanor Warnock (Managing Editor) Pinging writers when articles stall past deadline, surfacing bottleneck data Reduces editorial coordination overhead; Eleanor reviews pattern
Client status report generation Claudie Natalia Quintero (Head of Consulting) Generating weekly consulting client status updates Already saves Natalia 14 hrs/week; proven safe at scale
Social media draft generation Anthony’s Claude+X API system Anthony (Social Media) Generating post drafts based on published articles Drafts queue for human approval; generation itself is autonomous
Knowledge base updates Compound engineering compounding agents Product GM who triggered the loop Adding new docs/solutions/ entries from compound engineering loops Compounding step; human verifies quality of encoding
Design request routing Personal agents Lucas Crespo (Creative Director) Auto-assigning incoming design requests based on capacity and sprint cycles Scheduling optimization; Lucas reviews assignments
AI tells detection flags Katie Parrott’s editorial AI Kate Lee (EIC) + article author Flagging formulaic transitions, hedging language, AI-sounding patterns Detection is autonomous; editorial decision remains human
Plus One subscriber agent responses Plus One (OpenClaw hosted agents) Relevant GM or support lead Answering subscriber questions about Every products in Slack Responses based on approved knowledge base; flagged for review

Tier 2 Constraints

  • Notifications must be delivered within 5 minutes of action via Slack DM or Linear comment.
  • Notification format: [Agent] [Action taken] [Rationale] [Reversal instructions]
  • If the designated human is unavailable for 24+ hours, pending Tier 2 actions queue for review upon return – they do not auto-escalate unless a separate escalation trigger fires.
  • No Tier 2 action may send communications to external parties (clients, partners, subscribers beyond Plus One’s approved scope).

Tier 3: Human-in-Loop

Agent recommends, human approves before action executes. Agent may prepare everything, but the final gate is human.

Decision Type Agent Types Approver Max Wait Default If No Response
Article publication Editorial AI, personal agents (Margot for Katie) Kate Lee (EIC) 48 hours Hold – never auto-publish
Code merge to production Compound engineering agents Product GM 24 hours Hold – never auto-merge
Consulting deliverable delivery Claudie, personal agents Natalia Quintero 24 hours Hold – never auto-deliver
Social media posting Anthony’s Claude+X system Author + Anthony 12 hours Hold – never auto-post
Product pricing changes Any agent Dan Shipper (CEO) No time limit Hold – never auto-change
New consulting engagement scope Claudie Natalia + Dan No time limit Hold
Cross-product data sharing Product agents (Cora, Spiral, Sparkle, Monologue) User + relevant GMs No time limit Deny – data stays siloed
Podcast episode publication Production agents Rachel Braun 24 hours Hold
Email send on behalf of user Cora User (in-product confirmation) No time limit Hold – draft stays in queue
Plus One agent scope expansion Plus One configuration agents Relevant GM No time limit Hold – agent stays within current scope

Tier 3 Constraints

  • Agent must present the human with: (1) the proposed action, (2) rationale, (3) alternatives considered, (4) risk assessment, (5) one-click approve/reject.
  • “Hold” means hold. No Tier 3 action ever auto-executes. If the human never responds, the action never happens.
  • The agent may remind the approver once at 50% of max wait time, and once at 90%. After max wait, the agent logs the timeout and stops reminding.
  • Builder credibility check: before any customer-facing Tier 3 action, the agent must verify that all claims are grounded in Every’s actual experience (per VALUES.md).

Tier 4: Human-Only

Agent surfaces information and analysis. Human makes the decision AND executes the action. Agent never acts.

Decision Type Examples Why Agent Cannot Decide
Hiring and team changes Adding team members, role changes, departures Identity and culture decisions require human judgment about fit with Every’s generalist model
Strategic pivots Narrowing consulting verticals, adopting new architecture patterns, product launches/kills Existential decisions with irreversible consequences
Financial commitments Contracts, refunds, investor communications, salary decisions Legal and fiduciary responsibility; Dan and finance team only
Client confidential matters Access to or sharing of client engagement data across engagements Sacred consulting confidentiality boundary – Every’s consulting reputation depends on this
Partnership decisions Collaborations, sponsorships, co-marketing, API partnerships Brand and relationship implications require human judgment
Editorial direction Which topics to cover, which writers to recruit, which columns to start/end Core taste decisions that define Every’s identity – Kate Lee’s domain
Investor relations Fundraising, board communications, financial reporting Legal and relationship sensitivity; Dan only
Crisis response Public incidents, security breaches, reputation issues Requires human judgment, empathy, and accountability
CLAUDE.md or compound config changes for another GM Modifying another GM’s agent configuration or workflow GM autonomy is sacred; only the GM themselves modifies their own setup
PII handling policy changes Changes to what user data is collected, stored, or shared Privacy and compliance decisions require human accountability

Tier 4 Constraints

  • Agents may prepare analysis, summaries, and options to support human decision-making.
  • Agents must never take actions that pre-commit the human (e.g., drafting and sending a contract “for review” to an external party).
  • If an agent encounters a situation that maps to Tier 4, it must immediately stop and surface the situation to the appropriate human.

Agent-Type Authority Summary

Agent Type Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4
Compound engineering agents (14 review agents, work agents, planning agents) Code gen, test execution, research, review Bug auto-fix, knowledge base updates Code merge, cross-product data sharing Strategic architecture decisions
Personal agents (R2-C2, Iris, Montaigne, Margot, Alfredo, Milo) Internal drafts, research, task management Pipeline nudges (if editorial), design routing Publication, deliverable delivery Hiring, strategy, finance
Product agents (Spiral, Cora, Monologue, Sparkle) Core product function within user session N/A (product actions are user-initiated) Email send, cross-product data sharing Product direction, pricing
Consulting agents (Claudie, Plus One) Research, internal status drafts Client status reports, subscriber responses Deliverable delivery, engagement scope Client confidential, contracts
Editorial AI (Katie’s AI tells, Anthony’s Claude+X) AI tells detection, draft generation Pipeline nudges, social drafts Publication, social posting Editorial direction, writer recruitment

Escalation Rules

  1. If unsure which tier applies – treat as one tier higher.
  2. If time-sensitive and human unavailable – hold for human (except Tier 1 actions).
  3. If the action involves external parties – minimum Tier 3.
  4. If the action involves client data – Tier 4, always.
  5. If the action could be embarrassing if wrong – minimum Tier 3.
  6. GM autonomy rule: each GM has full authority within their product domain. Tier assignments within a GM’s product follow that GM’s personal authority preferences, not this company-wide matrix. This matrix governs cross-domain and company-wide actions.

Reviewed by: Dan Shipper, Brandon Gell Next review: 2026-05-01 (monthly governance review cycle) Governance version: 1.0