Control what AI agents can read, call, write, and send.
Akretic is preparing limited Q3 2026 design-partner work for security, AI platform, and infrastructure teams moving one internal assistant workflow toward production readiness.
The near-term wedge is intentionally narrow: internal research and copilot workflows that combine approved internal documents, controlled public-web fetch, MCP-connected tools or selected APIs, approval-gated side effects, and reviewable evidence.
This is not a broad product launch. Akretic is using the public site to find the right Q3 design-partner workflows and keep claims aligned with current scope.
Design-partner proof chain
Authenticated identity
Requests use enterprise identity and group context, not model output.
Policy decision
Gate0 evaluates reads, tool calls, egress requests, and side effects.
Retrieval or tool path
Approved sources, controlled web fetch, and MCP tool surfaces stay scoped.
Approval checkpoint
Sensitive reads, writes, exports, and side effects route to review.
Evidence event
Material decisions produce evidence for security and platform teams.
The Focus
One enterprise assistant workflow, proven before expansion.
The strongest path to a useful Akretic is not a universal AI security promise. It is a disciplined design-partner motion around the workflows most buyers already need to harden before production.
Internal research or knowledge assistant
Approved internal document sources
Controlled public-web fetch
MCP-connected tools or selected APIs
Approval needs for writes, exports, or sensitive reads
Security team needs evidence before production expansion
Observation Mode
Observe first. Enforce only after the evidence is understood.
Observation Mode is the design-partner wedge: record what the assistant tried to read, call, write, or send; replay policy decisions; identify approval points; and turn the findings into a narrow enforcement plan.
$ akretic observe research-assistant.workflow --mode non-blocking
--checks identity, retrieval, tools, egress, approvals, evidence
---------------------------------------
Design-partner fit recorded. Enforcement plan requires scoped review.
What A Review Should Produce
A concrete report format before a commercial deployment.
The public sample report is illustrative, but it shows the kind of packet a Q3 design-partner workflow should produce for security and platform review.
Exposure report
Policy replay plan
Risky-read map
Approval candidates
Evidence sample format
Pilot-to-enforce implementation path
Boundaries
The site should earn trust by staying narrower than the ambition.
Now
Narrow Q3 design-partner prep
One assistant workflow, one identity boundary, approved internal sources, controlled public-web fetch, selected tool surfaces, and evidence review.
Scoped
Observation before enforcement
Policy decisions, risky reads, tool intents, egress attempts, and approval candidates are reviewed before any enforcement posture expands.
Not claimed
No universal AI safety promise
Akretic constrains agent behavior outside the model. It does not make model output deterministic or eliminate all AI risk.
Q3 2026 Design Partners
The best fit is a team with one real internal assistant pilot, clear source permissions, selected tool surfaces, and a security owner who needs evidence before broader production use.