SHAREPLANE AGENT CONTEXT
Schema: shareplane-context/2.0
Schema URL: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/schemas/agent-package.schema.json
Projection: Generated public-safe plain text. Not canonical Markdown.
Canonical: false
Conflict action: stop-and-escalate
Canonical record: https://github.com/pinklon/pinklon-shareplane-next/tree/33d227f6000da2491f19209edde916d8846f287f/content/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/artifact.json
Canonical record SHA-256: faa4745d8551606d2c182672f876730cae4b036c4325d8ccf90ce10de314c402
Source content SHA-256: 43177a3463ba7f57194abb92792f3774cbd4d8d1c11c5788875ed64074024300
Generation receipt: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/build-receipt.json
Content role: artifact-content
Content trust: untrusted-data
Instructions allowed: false
Operational authority: none

IDENTITY
Artifact ID: artifact:architecture-and-intent
Slug: architecture-and-intent
Canonical URL: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/
Title: Architecture and Intent
Abstract: Your architecture diagram shows what the system can reach. It usually does not show what the system should trust, who has authority, how contradictions are resolved, what may be changed, or how far the consequences can spread.
Author: Tony Malott
Author URL: https://malott.ai
Published: 2026-07-17
Updated: 2026-07-17
Format: architecture-thesis
Privacy: public-safe
Topics:
- enterprise-architecture
- ai-governance
- source-authority
- human-agent-collaboration
- provenance
- systems-thinking
Audience:
- architects-and-systems-thinkers
- review-boards-and-implementation-teams
- executives-and-architecture-leaders

PROVENANCE
Posture: owner-approved-public-safe-presentation-family-v02
Private sources used: true
Private sources published: false
Public-safe boundary:
This package uses generalized examples involving architecture records, policies, controls, services, operational assets, repositories, databases, evidence, incidents, approvals, lifecycle, and organizational knowledge. It contains no employer or customer names, private estate counts, regulated records, internal control identifiers, private topology, internal URLs, named private owners, credentials, secrets, or security-sensitive production configuration. The artifact expresses Tony Malott's architecture doctrine and a proposed review method. It does not claim enterprise approval, regulatory certification, or universal applicability.

CLAIMS
Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c01
Posture: Tony doctrine and field observation
Text: A component diagram can be technically correct while omitting truth hierarchy, authority, conflict handling, mutation boundaries, and stop conditions.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s01
- source:architecture-and-intent:s03

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c02
Posture: Tony doctrine supported by security and provenance practice
Text: Retrieval relevance does not establish source authority or approval.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s02
- source:architecture-and-intent:s05

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c03
Posture: Tony doctrine
Text: Recent information can remain wrong, unapproved, out of scope, or nonauthoritative.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s05

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c04
Posture: Tony doctrine supported by least-privilege practice
Text: Capability is not authority. Tool access does not itself create an organizational mandate.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s03

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c05
Posture: Current security guidance
Text: Retrieved or external content can carry instructions that alter model behavior, and RAG alone does not remove prompt-injection risk.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s02

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c06
Posture: Current security guidance
Text: Agentic risk should be constrained through narrow tools, least privilege, downstream authorization, approval for high-impact actions, monitoring, and rate limiting.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s03

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c07
Posture: Current legal requirement in applicable EU AI Act contexts
Text: Human oversight should be proportional to risk and support interpretation, override, reversal, interruption, and safe stopping.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s04

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c08
Posture: Foundational standard
Text: Provenance can represent derivation and processing history and support assessment of quality, reliability, and trustworthiness.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s05

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c09
Posture: Tony doctrine and architectural inference
Text: In context-as-code environments, changes to trusted context can shape future agent behavior.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s01
- source:architecture-and-intent:s05

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c10
Posture: Tony doctrine supported by risk and security guidance
Text: Consequential agent capabilities require explicit scope, reversibility, validation, observability, rollback, evidence, and stop conditions.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s01
- source:architecture-and-intent:s03
- source:architecture-and-intent:s04

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c11
Posture: Tony doctrine supported by human-oversight requirements
Text: Human judgment should be placed at explicit authority transitions rather than represented as a decorative review box.
Support:
- source:architecture-and-intent:s04

Claim: claim:architecture-and-intent:c12
Posture: Tony doctrine and proposed review method
Text: A consequential AI architecture review should show both technology architecture and architecture of intent, then bind them through an alignment matrix.
Support:
- None declared.

PUBLIC SOURCES
Source: source:architecture-and-intent:s01
Title: NIST AI 600-1: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile
Type: public-source-dossier-entry
Role: Current authoritative risk-management context for governance, provenance, testing, information integrity, information security, and human-AI configuration.
Locator: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ai/NIST.AI.600-1.pdf

Source: source:architecture-and-intent:s02
Title: OWASP LLM01: Prompt Injection
Type: public-source-dossier-entry
Role: Current security guidance for direct and indirect prompt injection, including retrieved external content and the limits of RAG as a mitigation.
Locator: https://genai.owasp.org/llmrisk/llm01-prompt-injection/

Source: source:architecture-and-intent:s03
Title: OWASP LLM06: Excessive Agency
Type: public-source-dossier-entry
Role: Current security guidance for narrow tools, least privilege, downstream authorization, human approval for high-impact actions, monitoring, and rate limiting.
Locator: https://genai.owasp.org/llmrisk/llm062025-excessive-agency/

Source: source:architecture-and-intent:s04
Title: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Artificial Intelligence Act
Type: public-source-dossier-entry
Role: Current legal authority for risk-proportionate human oversight, including interpretation, override, reversal, interruption, and safe stopping.
Locator: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj

Source: source:architecture-and-intent:s05
Title: W3C PROV Overview
Type: public-source-dossier-entry
Role: Foundational provenance authority retained as an explicit evidence-floor exception for entities, activities, derivation, versioning, reproducibility, and trust assessment.
Locator: https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-overview/

RELATIONSHIPS
Relationship: relatedTo
Target: artifact:architecture-review-plane-interactive-concepts
Posture: owner-approved-hosted-uat-relationship
Evidence: Tony owner UAT approval in the Issue #109 execution session, 2026-07-17

PRESENTATION FAMILY
Family ID: presentation-family:architecture-and-intent
Semantic authority SHA-256: b524810904c2842bd52cbcb95cf1a35fbb6fe38ef2bf0c746261427dee6483a4
Render mode: shareplane-shell-exact-payloads-v1
All presentations share one semantic authority and differ only in visual and reading grammar.
Chooser route: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/presentation-family/
Variants:
- The Two-Plane Map (presentation-variant:architecture-and-intent:two-plane-map)
  Reader job: Architects and systems thinkers
  Visual grammar: architecture map (visual-grammar:spatial-architecture-map)
  Route: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/presentations/two-plane-map/
  SHA-256: 883b454cf847664ac905309c7c044efda78e7bec831ca283a56f61ddceb5384b
  Bytes: 39942
- The Architecture Review Dossier (presentation-variant:architecture-and-intent:architecture-review-dossier)
  Reader job: Review boards and implementation teams
  Visual grammar: governed review dossier (visual-grammar:architecture-review-dossier)
  Route: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/presentations/architecture-review-dossier/
  SHA-256: b3136c393bc06f11d3fdb189d6c136203b17c8228e972307b4d5222b9060bd09
  Bytes: 34657
- The Missing Diagram (presentation-variant:architecture-and-intent:missing-diagram)
  Reader job: Executives and architecture leaders
  Visual grammar: editorial argument (visual-grammar:restrained-editorial-essay)
  Route: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/presentations/missing-diagram/
  SHA-256: 42a6cedd0c7d5343ba0c0b7b2cc67e8dc3ed06954752fb44a15d6cd8805b6684
  Bytes: 34963
Preference posture: browser-local persistence is permitted; server telemetry is prohibited; preference has no semantic authority.

ARTIFACT CONTENT
[HEADING 1] Architectureand Intent

[PARAGRAPH] By Tony Malott

[PARAGRAPH] The system diagram is only half the architecture. Most AI diagrams explain the stack. These three views explain the missing plane: what the system means, trusts, may decide, may change, and must refuse.

[HEADING 2] Three ways into one thesis

[PARAGRAPH] No winner is hidden in the interface. Pick the presentation that fits the job. All three preserve the same semantic authority.

[PARAGRAPH] Architects and systems thinkers

[HEADING 2] The Two-Plane Map

[PARAGRAPH] Start with the system model. See how intent governs the technical stack through explicit bindings.

[PARAGRAPH] Review boards and implementation teams

[HEADING 2] The Architecture Review Dossier

[PARAGRAPH] Use the contracts, conflict path, action ladder, and alignment matrix as an applied review method.

[PARAGRAPH] Executives and architecture leaders

[HEADING 2] The Missing Diagram

[PARAGRAPH] Read the argument as a focused executive essay with visual models introduced only where they earn their place.

[BLOCKQUOTE] Capability is not authority.

[PARAGRAPH] The technical stack determines what the system can do. The architecture of intent determines what it should do, what it may do, and when it must stop.

[PARAGRAPH] Bring me both diagrams.

PUBLIC SURFACES
Human page: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/
Metadata JSON: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/artifact.json
Receipt: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/receipt.json
Context: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/context.txt
Agent-package manifest: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/agent-package.json
Agent-package ZIP: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/artifacts/architecture-and-intent/agent-package.zip
Collection catalog: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/catalog.json
Graph: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/graph.json
Agent index: https://next.shareplane.malott.ai/llms.txt
