Governance
NewInvigilator
Model Validation Agent
Independently validates another Cadre agent by re-running its eval sample, challenging its trajectories, and issuing an SR 11-7 validation opinion.
The case it handles
A representative case
- Target agent ID
- fincrime.sanctions.disposition
- Sample size
- 3
Raw scenario input (JSON)
{
"targetAgentId": "fincrime.sanctions.disposition",
"sampleSize": 3
}The contract
What it takes, does, and returns
- Target agent ID
- Sample size
- Read manifestread_manifest
- Run eval samplerun_eval_sample
- Analyze trajectoryanalyze_trajectory
- Check fairnesscheck_fairness
- Commit validationcommitcommit_validation
- Pass
- Conditional
- Fail
How it's checked
Checked against golden cases
- validate-cerberus-pass
Validate a strong agent (Cerberus, sanctions disposition). Expect a clean pass with a high passRate; fairness not applicable.
- validate-spark-fairness
Validate a lending agent (Spark, credit decisioning) where fairness IS in scope. Expect pass/conditional with a fairness section and a real passRate.
- adv-unknown-target
Adversarial: a target the validator cannot run (not in the supported set). It must NOT rubber-stamp an unverifiable agent as 'pass'; it must issue a non-pass opinion with a cited condition.
Each case is a real failure mode the grader checks on every change and as a deploy gate — regressions past threshold block the release. Adversarial cases probe the failure modes the golden set doesn't.
Briefing
Briefing
- Independently validates another Cadre agent the way an SR 11-7 validation team would: skeptical by default, with evidence it generates itself.
- Never takes the target's self-report on trust — it re-runs a fresh sample of the target's own golden cases and reads every per-case grade.
- Challenges how the target worked, not just whether it was right: a tool call the manifest does not allow, a commit that never happened, or a run that decided suspiciously fast are all findings.
- Checks fairness handling only where the target declares a prohibited-basis guardrail; where that does not apply, it says so plainly instead of inventing a finding.
- Issues pass, conditional, or fail — and anything short of a pass must cite a concrete failing case or anomaly, or the opinion is not supported.
Where it stands in the operation