AI Process Assurance compares the expected workflow with what actually happened - so regulated teams can govern, evidence and safely automate AI-assisted work. We do it for insurance, financial services and other regulated industries.
It is a way of governing AI-assisted work by comparing the path it was supposed to follow with the path it actually followed. Airclerk defines the expected path with a Workflow Charter, records what actually happened inside those instrumented workflows with a Semantic Audit, and shows the difference. The retained result is an AI Workpaper: a business-readable evidence record for every material decision.
Platform logs, chat history and technical traces are useful, but they don't naturally produce a business-readable record of the work. Airclerk's answer is a retained AI Workpaper showing what happened, why it happened, what evidence supported it, what controls applied, and who approved the outcome.
Two records, one comparison. A Workflow Charter says what should happen. A Semantic Audit records what did. The gap between them is where governance, compliance and operational control actually live.
The required stages, evidence, authority limits and approval gates for a repeatable process - plus the persistent memory that keeps an AI assistant on that path across sessions.
A business-readable record of what actually happened, captured as the assistant works: the steps taken, the evidence used, the decisions made and the approvals recorded.
When the actual path diverges from the charter - a required approval missing, evidence not attached, a step skipped, a gate bypassed - Airclerk flags an exception. That is the moment an audit trail becomes operational control.
Each module earns its place alone. Semantic Audit gives you retrospective evidence. Workflow Charter gives your AI durable process memory. Run together, they give regulated teams control over AI-assisted work.
Defines what should happen — and remembers it
Records what actually happened, in business language
The thing you actually keep - and the thing you hand to a reviewer, an auditor or a regulator. Business-readable, not a technical log.
Comparing expected against actual turns a passive record into something that surfaces configured exceptions automatically.
The charter required human sign-off before a client-facing communication. The audit shows none was recorded. Airclerk flags it.
A claim decision required a policy-wording citation. The decision was drafted without one. The gap is visible, not buried.
A required claims-history review never ran before the renewal recommendation. The workflow moved on anyway - and that shows.
Work transitioned past an approval gate despite unmet criteria. Where that's visible in the instrumented workflow, it's flagged as an exception on the workpaper.
A workpaper is only useful if the people who need it can read it without a data team. These are the readers it's written for.
A defensible record is one that's honest about its own edges. Here are ours.
What we record. The work that runs through Airclerk-connected workflows and tools, captured as the assistant works. Calls to Airclerk tools are recorded directly; other approved tool use is captured where it runs through the instrumented workflow, with reconciliation against platform traces where available.
What we don't claim. We don't pretend to capture work a person does entirely outside the workflow - copying an answer into a document and editing it by hand, or deliberately going around the rails. That's a control you own. Reconciliation against platform traces can narrow the gap over time.
Airclerk can be hosted by us with per-tenant isolation, or deployed single-tenant into your own Azure tenant on request. Raw workflow data and source documents can stay inside your environment; Airclerk holds the configured evidence record, workflow state and control comparison. Full security posture on the Trust page.
The clearest place the value shows up first: commercial insurance renewals, run by AI agents and evidenced end to end. The renewal's charter defines the path; Semantic Audit records what happened; the workpaper is the retained record available for audit.
We start narrow: take one high-value workflow and make it a governed, evidenced workflow you can defend.
Two weeks. We confirm scope, map your systems, define the charter and controls, and produce a board-ready implementation plan for the first workflow.
We charter the workflow, instrument the Semantic Audit, wire approvals and evidence, and stand up the workpaper - connected to your systems and your Claude environment.
Turn on the control comparison: missing steps, missing approvals and unmet criteria surface as exceptions, and every run leaves a retained workpaper.
A way of governing AI-assisted work by comparing the path it was supposed to follow with the path it actually followed. Airclerk defines the expected path (Workflow Charter), records what actually happened (Semantic Audit), and shows the difference - producing a retained, business-readable AI Workpaper for every material decision.
Most AI governance and model-risk tooling works before deployment - is the model safe, fair, accurate. AI Process Assurance works at runtime and after the fact: did the actual work follow the required path, with the right evidence and approvals. It's operational control, not pre-deployment testing.
Yes. Semantic Audit stands alone as a retained evidence trail; Workflow Charter stands alone as durable process memory and guidance for your AI. The control comparison - expected vs actual - is what you get when you run both.
Airclerk records the work that runs through its instrumented workflows and tools, as the assistant works. It does not claim to capture work a person does entirely outside those workflows, such as copying an answer into a document and editing it by hand. That boundary is deliberate; deliberate human circumvention is a customer-side control, not something Airclerk pretends to catch.
Claude-first, platform-aware. Airclerk works as a sibling MCP alongside your other connectors, so the AI client decides which tools to call and Airclerk records the evidence, state and control around them. The evidence layer is independent of any single AI platform.
Hosted by Airclerk with per-tenant isolation, or single-tenant in your own Azure tenant on request. Raw workflow data and source documents can remain inside your environment. See the Trust page for the full security posture.
If you're putting AI to work on material decisions and the evidence has become the limiting factor, this is the conversation.