Permission Is Not Permanent: Why Professional Actions Need an Action Time Check
A past approval is evidence of what was allowed then. Before consequential action, Anunnaki.Live must test whether the matter, evidence, authority and rule remain current now.
A professional approval is not a permanent passport. It belongs to a particular matter, evidence set, authority, rule and moment. If one of those changes, repeating the old approval can become the very error the approval was meant to prevent.
A new paper on runtime control for AI agents makes this distinction explicit: evaluation can say that a case was acceptable at one point, but action requires a fresh decision against the case as it exists immediately before effect. The paper tests this concept with authored deterministic cases, not live deployments. Its value is the control principle.
What Anunnaki.Live now records
Every new Replay package records the historical determination and a separate action time gate. The gate requires a comparison of the sealed dependency manifest against current evidence, authority, rules and external state before consequential action. If a material dependency changed, ABOS creates a successor determination instead of carrying the old one forward.
The original package is never rewritten. It remains proof of the determination that was made then. The successor package shows what changed, why it mattered and what the present conclusion is.
Why this matters to a relying professional
A reviewer can now ask two exact questions: did the original determination reproduce from its stated basis, and was it still current when an action was taken? Those questions are different. A true answer to the first does not automatically answer the second.
Source: Runtime Control for AI Agents. Read the complete Replay upgrade here.