Why Catha treats this as governance: AI capability and business authority are not the same thing. The business should decide the control before the system is allowed to scale the action.

Three different questions

For every consequential action ask: Can the tool technically do it? Has the business permitted it? If permitted, may the AI do it without a human each time? These are capability, permission, and autonomy.

Permission actions

A practical permission model distinguishes READ, CREATE, MODIFY, SEND, PUBLISH, DELETE, EXPORT/SHARE, ADMINISTER, and EXECUTE rather than granting vague “access.”

Catha autonomy levels

A0 is prohibited. A1 is recommend only. A2 is prepare while a human executes. A3 is approval-controlled AI execution. A4 is bounded autonomous execution inside explicit conditions.

Autonomy belongs to actions

An agent may be A4 for internal research, A2 for customer communications, and A0 for deleting records. Labeling the whole agent “autonomous” hides these distinctions.

Promotion and downgrade

Autonomy can increase only when authority, rules, permissions, evidence, monitoring, and recovery controls support it. Monitoring events may also force an autonomy downgrade.

How this fits the Catha AI Governance Build Kit

This topic is one part of the broader Catha AI Governance Build Kit, a fourteen-stage build process covering business outcome, governance discovery, authority, rules, permissions, autonomy, workflow design, validation, receipts, production approval, monitoring, recovery, final readback, and platform export.

The governance baseline belongs to the business. Platform-specific implementation may differ, but approved authority, rules, permissions, autonomy, approvals, and evidence requirements should not silently change.