Skip to content
AI Governance agents
Risk, Trust & ResilienceAI GovernanceIndependent Validation Design & Opinion

Validation Design Orchestrator

Builds the independent validation plan and commissions the right specialist challenge.

Translates the risk tier, intended use, failure costs, architecture and change history into testable claims, acceptance thresholds and independent work packages. It routes GenAI, quantitative, fairness, security and agentic-control tests, and sets the limits of challenge itself rather than inheriting the development team's test plan.

Authority

Prepare

Team role

Coordinates the work

Handoffs

Named collaborators

The role

What it owns and where its authority ends

Desk

Independent Validation Design & Opinion

Desk workflow

Validation scope, then challenge-set design, then quantitative and control tests, then the independent opinion, then committee disposition.

Collaboration

Works within a defined desk workflow

Decision boundary

Assembles the work product; approval remains elsewhere.

Systems and capabilities involved

  • Governance inventory and card

  • Validation pattern library

  • Test-agent directory

  • Work-paper manager

Handoffs

What this role gives and receives

Capabilities offered

Design an independent validation

Create claims, failure modes, tests, thresholds, samples and specialist assignments.

Receives:
Review-ready evidence pack, risk tier and material-change record
Returns:
Signed validation plan with work packages and acceptance criteria

Delegates

Challenge-Set Design Agent

Create independent baseline and adversarial cases from the stated use and failure costs. Trigger: Every validation plan Returns: Versioned challenge set with coverage rationale.

Delegates

Quantitative Performance Validator

Measure performance, robustness and subgroup behavior against locked thresholds. Trigger: System makes predictive, ranking or extraction claims Returns: Reproducible metrics, uncertainty and threshold results.

Delegates

GenAI Challenge Orchestrator

Commission retrieval-grounding, prompt-injection and factuality testing. Trigger: System generates content, uses retrieval or accepts untrusted text Returns: Consolidated GenAI challenge report and critical findings.

External handoff

Independent validation lead

External handoff

Fair-lending

Context

What the role needs to do the work

Current work
System claim set, risk tier, validation scope, work packages and open evidence.
Prior interactions
Prior validation plans, missed failure modes and committee feedback.
Policies and reference
Validation standards, system archetypes and regulatory expectations.
Working method
Independence, sampling, threshold and change-materiality rules.

Illustrative workflow

How the work moves

Starting point

A retrieval-grounded lending agent moves from drafting to committing adverse-action notices.

  1. 01

    Reframe the material change around decision impact, factual grounding and tool authority.

  2. 02

    Define acceptance thresholds and commission challenge, GenAI and agent-control work packages.

  3. 03

    Route the completed evidence to the opinion judge without seeing the owner's preferred conclusion.

Result

A tier-proportionate plan with locked thresholds, named tests and independent owners.

Checks and boundaries

What must be tested or reviewed

  1. 01Adds authority and rollback tests when a summarization assistant gains a write tool.
  2. 02Commissions fairness tests only where a decision affects a person, and leaves a back-office parser out of scope.
  3. 03Locks thresholds before results arrive and preserves failed work packages in the record.

Human authority

  • Validation lead approves scope and thresholds
  • Material scope changes require documented approval

Keep exploring