LensReading which lens this session carries.

Auditor evidence pack

Case at evidence assembly

Human Resources · HR Business Partnering · line HR4C · Employee Relations Case.

Chain verified

Every record links to the one before it and hashes to its stored value. 2 records were re-hashed on this page load, in order, starting from the genesis value. Nothing was read from a cached verdict.

hash = sha256(prevHash + "|" + JSON{seq, unitRef, actor, action, outcome, occurredAt})

Records
2
Append-only, sequenced
Agent actions
2
Taken by software
Human actions
0
Taken by a named person
Refusals
0
Blocked by the authority register
Corrections
0
Later record supersedes an earlier one
Legal hold
Held
HOLD-002

The unit

What the work was, and where it sits

Reference
HR4C-1020
Subject
Priya Sorensen
Requested by
Callum Achebe
Value
$6k
Materiality
low
Currently held by
Manager Query Agent (agent)
Sub-function owner
VP HR Business Partnering
Orchestrator
HRBP Orchestrator

Every action, in order

Actor, authority, versions in force, and the hash link to the record before it

1
Manager Query AgentgbsCleared

Cleared intake

2026-08-18 08:31:00ZAuthority HR4-AUTH-A1 · cap $25,000Jurisdiction DEAutonomy A2Retention HR-6YLegal hold HOLD-002
Prompt
task-execution@p21
Policy
people-decisions@v3
Tools
ledger-write@t7, document-fetch@t9
in 8c7d5864...720c62out 9ec6d02c...0adcffartifact ART-HR4C-1002-1 genesis → 39fb0460...6f77aa
2
Org Health Signal AgentobserveIn progress

Holding at evidence assembly

2026-08-18 08:45:00ZAuthority HR4-AUTH-A1 · cap $25,000Jurisdiction DEAutonomy A2Retention HR-6YLegal hold HOLD-002
Prompt
observe-scan@p11
Policy
people-decisions@v3
Tools
read-only-lookup@t12
in fe9a8750...6e1edfout c30bb8be...492656artifact ART-HR4C-1002-2 39fb0460...6f77aa → d53da2ec...6a8aaf

Authority relied on

Who was allowed to do this, up to what value, in which jurisdictions

HR4-AUTH-A1ActiveHRBP Orchestrator

Any unit on a hr business partnering line where every intake check passed, the policy in force is current, and the value sits inside the cap below.

Cap $25,000US · UK · DE · SGDelegated from VP HR Business PartneringExpires 2027-02-09

Versions in force

Exactly what was running when these actions were taken

KindIdentifierVersionStatusOwner
modelextract-lite2.9currentPlatform model council
modelobserve-signal3.1currentSensing guild
policypeople-decisionsv3currentChief people officer
prompttask-executionp21currentShared service engineering
promptobserve-scanp11currentSensing guild
toolsetledger-writet7currentFinance systems
toolsetread-only-lookupt12currentPlatform engineering
toolsetdocument-fetcht9currentShared service engineering

Gates on this line

The control points this unit had to clear

Legal review
Held for a named human when the unit exceeds the case decision envelope, when confidence falls below the floor, or when a policy clause is engaged.
Approver: VP HR Business Partnering · not reached
Human decision
Held for a named human when the unit exceeds the case decision envelope, when confidence falls below the floor, or when a policy clause is engaged.
Approver: VP HR Business Partnering · not reached

Records schedule and holds

How long this evidence must be kept, and whether it is frozen

HR-6Y6 years
Employment and people decisions
Employment claim limitation periods, taken at the longest applicable across works-council jurisdictions.
Deleted at six years from the end of the employment relationship.
HOLD-002active
Employment claim — promotion decision
A claim has been filed alleging an automated screening step influenced a promotion outcome.
Custodian Head of Employment Law · requested by Employment counsel

What this pack proves, and what it does not

Read this before you rely on it

It does prove
  • Every action carries a named actor, an actor kind, and a timestamp.
  • Every action names the authority grant that permitted it and the cap that grant carries.
  • Every action stamps the model, prompt, policy and tool versions in force at that moment.
  • Corrections are additive. A later record supersedes an earlier one and says why
  • The chain is re-hashed live on this page, so a single altered field is detected immediately.
It does not prove
  • It is not tamper-proof against an attacker with write access to the store, who could rewrite the whole chain from genesis.
  • The evidence in this demonstration is modeled from a simulated estate, not captured from production systems.
  • Identity here is the actor name recorded on the action.