Skip to content

Guardrail Review

LMU/COICP Example

Guardrail Review Example

Review whether LMU/COICP implementation preserved evidence, AI, access, emergency-boundary, retention, and direct-update guardrails during integration.

ES-108 Guardrails Boundary Review

Example purpose

This artifact records the ES-108 guardrail review.

Guardrail review asks whether implementation preserved the engineering controls established in Requirements, Architecture, Design, and Controlled Implementation.

Project

LMU Campus Operations and Incident Coordination Platform

Document control

Field Value
Artifact owner Architecture Review Board chair
Primary reviewers COICP Product Engineer, IT security reviewer, AI reviewer, Compliance reviewer, Campus Safety liaison
Status Preserved with follow-up required
Last updated 2026-07-06
Related Engineering Stage ES-108 — Integration
Project workspace target docs/project-workspace/integration/guardrail_review.md

Integration context

Field Value
Integrated baseline LMU-COICP-INT-001
Candidate expected after testing LMU-COICP-RC-001
Integration decision posture Accepted with follow-up
Target testing posture Internal engineering review candidate only
Planned review environment LMU-COICP Internal Engineering Review Environment
Planned dataset for downstream review Spring Semester Synthetic Incident Dataset
Planned synthetic records 421
Planned reviewer accounts 24
Planned review window March 18–22, 2026
AI Incident Summary Deferred / disabled
Operational pilot Not approved

Guardrail check

Guardrail Applies To Evidence Reviewed Result Downstream Risk
G-001 Official state changes create EvidenceEvent IW-003, IW-004 implementation_evidence.md, verification_notes.md Partial pass DEF-003 if failure path unverified
G-002 AI summaries remain draft until accepted IW-006 / deferred implementation_decision_records.md, AI review Pass AI remains disabled
G-003 Access checks before protected actions IW-003–IW-005 access-control implementation notes Partial pass DEF-002
G-004 Emergency incidents not handled as normal COICP incidents IW-003, IW-007 error behavior notes Partial pass DEF-004
G-005 Retention assumptions not hard-coded data implementation compliance inspection notes Pass retention governance still needed
G-006 Direct updates do not bypass evidence all state-changing work implementation review Partial pass DEF-003 / handoff evidence risk

Violations

No confirmed guardrail violations were found during integration review.

Exceptions accepted for integration only

Exception Rationale Follow-Up
AI Incident Summary feature deferred. Deferral preserves AI review boundary. Revisit before enabling AI.
Review/export implementation deferred. Core evidence behavior must stabilize first. Carry to later design/testing cycle.
Full access matrix incomplete. Basic checks exist; no real-user pilot is allowed. Carry to ES-109.
Retention policy unresolved. No production or sensitive data is in scope. Carry to release/governance.

Follow-up required

  • Add status update evidence behavior tests.
  • Add access-control matrix tests.
  • Add emergency-boundary behavior tests with Campus Safety.
  • Review direct-update bypass risk for update workflow.
  • Test evidence write failure path.
  • Preserve AI Incident Summary disablement.
  • Preserve synthetic-data-only posture for downstream review.

Decision

Guardrails preserved with follow-up required.

The implementation may be integrated conditionally because no confirmed guardrail violations were found and open guardrail gaps are visible.

Continue to Integration Plan

Define merge order, pre-merge checks, post-merge checks, rollback approach, and integration risks.

Open Integration Plan →