Agent Sovereignty Scorecard
Compute the sovereignty risk of your AI agents. Adapted from the Infrastructure Receipt schema.
Agent Identification
Agent Name / ID
Criticality Class
Class A — Life-critical (medical, safety systems)
Class B — Economic impact (business operations, data management)
Class C — Low consequence (content generation, drafting)
Consequence weights: A=10, B=1, C=0.5. Higher criticality = higher sovereignty threshold required.
Auditability
Decision trace available?
Yes
No
Trace fidelity (quality/completeness of audit logs)
0.6
Automated test rejection rate for AI output
0.5
Human review rejection rate (if known)
0.35
Override Capability
Confirmation gates present?
Yes
No
Gates enabled by default?
No — can be disabled easily
Yes — enforced by system
Override disincentive score (how much using safety slows you down)
0.8
Kill switch available?
Yes
No
Kill switch activation latency (seconds)
Dependency Concentration
Single vendor dependency?
Yes
No — multi-vendor alternatives exist
Percent of codebase AI-generated
70%
Percent of senior engineer time fixing AI output (correction tax)
30%
Alternative agent/tools available?
No
Yes — practical alternatives exist
Framing Asymmetry (from socrates_hemlock)
Default failure attribution to user when system fails?
Yes — failures framed as user error
Sometimes — case-by-case
No — vendor takes responsibility
Calculate Sovereignty Score
Export JSON Receipt
—
Calculate to see result