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.

Why retries become dangerous

Agents often retry after timeouts, network errors, missing receipts, or downstream failures. That is safe only when the system knows the original action did not complete or the action is truly idempotent.

Four execution states

A practical model distinguishes NOT ATTEMPTED, ATTEMPTED — CONFIRMED FAILED, COMPLETED, and STATUS UNKNOWN.

Status unknown is not failure

If an email send, payment, form submission, publish action, or record change may have succeeded, local uncertainty must not be converted into confirmed failure.

Evidence before retry

The system should check provider status, external records, message IDs, transaction IDs, target state, or other evidence before repeating the action.

Recovery after uncertainty

If the status cannot be resolved, the workflow should escalate and keep the affected action blocked while unrelated safe work continues.

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.