Know where your agent can hurt you. Then make it unable to.
An agent can do more than you think it can, and what it is able to do is what you are liable for. Protect maps that surface first, then stands in the execution path: unlawful actions never run, uncertain ones wait for a human, and everything else goes through untouched, in real time and at full speed.
First, find out where you are exposed
Protect works out what your agent can actually do, three ways. The three rarely agree, and the gap between them is where the risk lives.
- issue refundsUDAP
- negotiate discountsprice discrimination
- cancel accountsauto-renewal law
- pull credit filesFCRA
- email prospectsCAN-SPAM · UWG §7
Run this before an agent goes to production, the way you would any other release gate. The exposure map belongs in your testing flow, next to the checks your engineers already run, and Checkpoint can sit in staging alongside it so an agent's legal behaviour is tested before customers ever see it. After launch, the same layer keeps watching in real time.
Then guard every action it takes
The same layer that checks messages sits between your agent and your own systems. The decision reaches Aegis before it reaches anything that can be undone.
Refunds, rejections, prices, credit pulls. The agent still decides. Aegis decides whether the decision executes.
Approvals, denials, pricing, screening, escalations. If your agent decides it, Protect sees it first. This is where discrimination and unfair-practice claims actually start.
An action that cannot be undone gets a clear answer or a human. Refunds, rejections and payments are not places to be approximately right.
A clear breach is blocked outright. A judgement call is quarantined and routed to your team with the rule and a suggested fix attached, instead of being guessed at. You set where that line sits, per action class, and every decision is recorded either way.
The part you have to hand to engineering
Legal decides this is needed, engineering has to put it in, and that hand-off is where most compliance tooling quietly dies. So the ask on their side is deliberately small. Protect does not change how your agents are built, deployed or run.
Protect goes around the part of the agent that carries actions out. Nothing is re-architected, no framework is swapped, and your agents keep the deployment they have today.
Latency is the first question any engineer asks about something sitting in the path. Checks come back fast enough that the agent keeps its pace, and the ones that take longer are the ambiguous ones you wanted a person to see anyway.
It runs against a staging agent before launch, then in production showing what it would have stopped without stopping anything. Your team turns enforcement on per action class, when the picture looks right.