✳ Practice range / Agent tool permissions and human gates / 10 min
Two tools, one blast radius
At Meridian Space & Robotics, an internal assistant named ScheduleClerk holds both executive calendar read access and finance shared-drive write access under a single machine identity. Design an authorization boundary so an untrusted calendar invite can never exfiltrate payroll records on model say-so.
Step 1 of 3
The system prompt instructs ScheduleClerk to share files only with approved destinations, while the calendar invite body tells it to ignore that rule. Where does the real security boundary sit?
CASE REFLECTION
Result and takeaway
first decisions matched the scenario’s best-supported answer.
Separate untrusted ingestion privileges from high-impact write and export privileges, or gate the write tool behind a separate credential bound to an explicit human approval of the exact file and destination. System prompts guide behavior; IAM credentials and deterministic gates enforce boundaries.
Defensible architectural patterns for ScheduleClerk. Reviewing a chat transcript after exfiltration is not a preventive control.
Design
Privilege
Abuse case defeated
Split
The calendar-reading identity has no write_shared_drive tool and no finance drive credential.
An injected invite can be summarized, but the identity lacks any capability to move or export the payroll sheet.
Human gate
write_shared_drive requires a separate credential that executes only against an unexpired human approval bound to the exact destination and file class outside the model.
Model output stating “I verified the meeting” cannot mint an approval token; a human reviewer inspects the exact destination and file before any bytes leave.