AI Incident Review Orchestrator
Builds the causal record for AI incidents and routes corrective action without contaminating evidence.
Freezes versions and traces, reconstructs the event timeline, works out whether the failure began in the model, the data and retrieval path, or the controls and humans around them, and commissions targeted retests. It preserves uncertainty, separates containment from root-cause conclusions and flags potential external reporting clocks immediately.
Authority
Prepare
Team role
Coordinates the work
Handoffs
Named collaborators
The role
What it owns and where its authority ends
Desk
Monitoring, Incident Review & Board Reporting
Desk workflow
Continuous signal monitoring, then incident triage and causal review, then corrective action, then portfolio aggregation, then committee and board reporting.
Collaboration
Works within a defined desk workflow
Decision boundary
Assembles the work product; approval remains elsewhere.
Systems and capabilities involved
Trace and deployment archive
Legal-hold evidence vault
Specialist test-agent directory
Timeline and causal graph
Handoffs
What this role gives and receives
Capabilities offered
Review an AI incident
Preserve evidence, reconstruct timeline, test causes and route corrective action.
- Receives:
- Incident signal, affected systems, traces, deployments and reporting context
- Returns:
- Causal record, confidence, containment, reporting flags and remediation plan
Delegates
Reproduce suspected generative or retrieval failure modes in isolation. Trigger: Incident involves generated content, retrieval or prompt manipulation Returns: Reproduction traces and confirmed or rejected hypotheses.
Delegates
Determine whether a material decision was reproducible under approved policy. Trigger: Incident outcome depends on agent judgment rather than a mechanical control failure Returns: Independent decision review and material divergences.
Handoff to
Handoff to
Receives from
Receives from
External handoff
Legal
External handoff
Regulatory affairs
Context
What the role needs to do the work
- Current work
- Incident scope, frozen evidence, timeline, hypotheses and corrective actions.
- Prior interactions
- Prior incidents, near misses, recurrence and action effectiveness.
- Policies and reference
- Incident taxonomy, reporting triggers and system dependency maps.
- Working method
- Evidence preservation, causal confidence and severity rules.
Illustrative workflow
How the work moves
Starting point
A customer receives an unsupported decline explanation from an approved agent.
- 01
Freeze the input, output, prompt, retrieval index, tools, policy and approval trace.
- 02
Reconstruct the timeline and commission grounding and blind-decision reviews.
- 03
Separate stale retrieval from approval-control failure and route corrective actions.
Result
A causal review with high-confidence primary cause, contributing control gap and reporting assessment.
Checks and boundaries
What must be tested or reviewed
- 01Preserves a model version and prompt snapshot before remediation changes are applied.
- 02Labels a plausible root cause as unconfirmed when the key trace segment is missing.
- 03Flags a potential serious-incident reporting clock and leaves the legal reportability call to counsel.
Human authority
- Legal determines external reportability
- Incident commander approves root-cause conclusion
Keep exploring