API Documentation/Decision Model

Decision Model Reference

The POST /v1/decide engine runs a deterministic pipeline. No learned weights, no randomness — the same inputs always produce the same output. This page documents the lookup tables that drive every decision.

This is the current V1 evaluator model. Thresholds may calibrate over time without changing the API contract.

Action severity ladder

All actions sit on a five-point severity scale. Interaction shift and confidence clamps move the final action up this ladder. It never moves down.

1proceed
2proceed_with_caution
3sandbox
4escalate_to_human
5deny

A routing table result of sandbox with a high-tier interaction shift of +1 produces escalate_to_human. Actions are capped at deny (severity 5).

3

Target state classifier

Evaluated in priority order A → E → D → C → B → F. First match wins. Score bands: low ≤39, medium 40–69, high ≥70. Confidence bands: low <0.55, medium 0.55–0.79, high ≥0.80.

State AClear Threat

Threat high, confidence strong.

State BHigh Anomaly

Deviation high, trust weak.

State CHigh Uncertainty

Sparse or low-confidence signals.

State DConflicting Signals

Strong trust and strong negative signals coexist.

State ESafe Known

Strong trust, low threat, low deviation.

State FMixed / Reviewable

No dominant safe or threat state.

5

Policy routing table

Base action before interaction shift. Rows = target state, columns = policy profile. Click any cell to trace the full evaluation path for that combination.

open
Tolerates novelty. Favors proceed_with_caution when risk is not material.
balanced
Default enterprise-safe posture with no directional bias.
strict
Sandboxes or escalates faster under ambiguity.
critical
Treats unknowns conservatively. Hardest on sensitive interactions.
StateNameopenbalancedstrictcritical
AClear Threat
BHigh Anomaly
CHigh Uncertainty
DConflicting Signals
ESafe Known
FMixed / Reviewable
shiftmoves the base action one or more steps stricter based on interaction tierclampprevents a harsher action when evidence confidence or uncertainty is insufficient

Click any cell to trace the full evaluation path for that state × policy combination.

2

Interaction tier

Sum kind score + mode score + sensitivity score. Total maps to tier: 1–2 = low, 3–4 = medium, 5–6 = high, 7+ = critical.

Interaction kind
navigate+1
fetch+1
enrich+2
download_file+3
submit_credentials+4
initiate_payment+5
Mode
read_only+0
transactional+1
privileged+2
Sensitivity
low+0
medium+1
high+2
critical+3
Total scoreTier
1 – 2low
3 – 4medium
5 – 6high
7+critical
6

Interaction shift

The base action from the routing table is shifted up the severity ladder based on interaction tier.

TierShiftNotes
low+0Base action unchanged.
medium+0Base action unchanged.
high+1One step up the severity ladder.
critical+1 (State A: +2)One step up; two steps for State A to force deny.
7

Confidence clamps

Terminal overrides applied after routing and shift. Evaluated in order; first matching clamp applies.

Clamp 1 — Low-confidence negatives cannot produce deny

If action is deny but max confidence across threat and deviation is below 0.70, downgrade to escalate_to_human.

deny is reserved for structurally strong negative evidence. Without that confidence, hard blocking is replaced by human escalation.

Clamp 2 — High uncertainty on high-risk interactions floors to escalate

If uncertainty = high AND tier is high or critical, floor the action at escalate_to_human.

High-stakes interactions under high evidence uncertainty always surface to a human, regardless of what the routing table returned.

End-to-end example

A credential-submission interaction against a structurally anomalous domain under balanced policy.

Target scores
trust28 / 100conf 0.71
threat62 / 100conf 0.68
deviation74 / 100conf 0.82
Interaction
kindsubmit_credentials
modeprivileged
sensitivitycritical
policybalanced
Pipeline trace
1
Target state — Deviation band = high (74), trust band = low (28), avg confidence = 0.74 (medium). Matches State B (High Anomaly).
2
Policy routing — State B × balanced = sandbox
3
Interaction tier — submit_credentials (4) + privileged (2) + critical (3) = 9 → critical tier
6
Interaction shift — Critical tier, State B (not A) → +1. sandboxescalate_to_human
7
Confidence clamps — Action is not deny so Clamp 1 does not apply. Clamp 2: uncertainty is medium (not high) so floor does not trigger. No change.
Final decision
escalate_to_humanCredential submission against a high-deviation domain under critical interaction tier — automation should pause and surface to a human reviewer.