AI agent answers">← Back to the topic hub
AI Agent Trust Layer Comparison
Last updated: 2026-09-24
Short answer: An AI agent trust layer can combine identity, permission controls, execution records, integrity checks, and upstream evidence. Compare each layer by the claim it supports. Identity is not execution, integrity is not an outside outcome, and a policy decision is not proof that the action happened.
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23. This page describes a reviewable evidence pattern and does not claim an outside result without upstream confirmation.
Comparison matrix
| Layer | Evidence | Claim supported |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | Caller scope and opaque execution identity. | Which execution or actor is being reviewed? |
| Permission | Policy, approval, or authorization record. | Was the action allowed to start? |
| Execution | Tool call, observed result, timestamp, and status. | What ran and what did the system observe? |
| External evidence | Callback, read-back, settlement, or provider reference. | Did the outside system confirm the expected state? |
Open a public execution receipt or call its verifier. The example reports verification_status: verified for the stored record. It is not proof of an unobserved external outcome.
Frequently asked questions
AI agent trust layer comparison
An AI agent trust layer can combine identity, permission controls, execution records, integrity checks, and upstream evidence. Compare each layer by the claim it supports. Identity is not execution, integrity is not an outside outcome, and a policy decision is not proof that the action happened.
What can a verifiable receipt prove?
It can show what the execution layer recorded and what its integrity checks verify. It cannot prove an unobserved outside outcome.
How can another reviewer check the record?
Open the public receipt, compare the tool, time, result, and status, then call the verifier. Keep outside confirmations separate from the execution record.