Regulatory intelligence · Agent concept

Regulatory Intelligence Agent

Support citation-first research across an approved set of Philippine regulatory sources.

AgentConcept0.1.0-concept

Nothing in this preview is executable and no credentials are issued. This record is Concept — documentation preview only

When to use it

Check that it fits before you look at the detail.

Consider this when

Accept a question with regulator or jurisdiction scope and optional date and source filters.
Return a supported research answer with citations and source dates.
Surface conflicting provisions, precedence questions, and unresolved gaps.

Do not use it to

Issue binding regulatory interpretations.
Represent that coverage is current without a named source set and review date.
Take or recommend regulatory action without qualified review.

Who this is for

Technical evaluatorsInstitutional buyersImplementation partnersQualified regulatory professionals

A reviewer needs a structured research response with source dates, citations, and visible unresolved issues.

Assumes: Ability to inspect structured outputs, evidence, limitations, and the stated human-review boundary.

Who decides what

What this concept may decide on its own, and what it may not.

A person decides

Regulatory interpretation, precedence assessment, and action remain with qualified professionals.

Citations and source dates are provided for review; they do not establish legal conclusions.

It is not for

Binding legal advice
Automatic compliance determination
Unreviewed regulatory action

What you get back

The shape of the exchange, and what happens when it is not sure.

You send

example_idquestionregulator_scopedate_scopesource_filters

You receive

example_idstatusanswercitationsprecedence_noteswarningsapproval_state

Shape taken from the synthetic supported answer example. It is not a stable contract.

Evidence

Every material statement should point to the approved source set and display source dates.

Uncertainty

Conflicts, missing sources, or unresolved precedence remain visible.

supported answercitationssource datesconflict or precedence notesabstention statereview flags

Next step

Continue with the evidence you need.

Inspect the reference

The human-guided workflow, its approval points, and the information contract.

Read the evidence

Four made-up cases — one answer it can support, and the three ways it declines to give one.

Information contract

Reference

No base path, method, or schema is validated. The fields below describe intended information needs, not a stable contract.

Field	Type	Constraint
`question`	string	A focused research question.
`regulator_scope`	array	One or more approved regulator or jurisdiction labels.
`date_scope`	object	Conceptual start/end or as-of date.
`source_filters`	array	Identifiers from the approved corpus.

Workflow

Produce citation-first regulatory research from an approved source set.

Context

The caller provides requirements and an approved source set.

Agent work

The concept produces evidence-linked output and surfaces uncertainty.

Approval

A qualified reviewer interprets, approves, and decides any next action.

Approval points

qualified review before interpretation or action

Outputs

supported answercitationssource datesconflict or precedence notesabstention statereview flags

Every material statement should point to the approved source set and display source dates.

Error and limit states

State	Meaning
`invalid_input`	Required input is missing or malformed.
`unsupported_request`	The request falls outside the documented capability or human decision boundary.
`unavailable_source`	A required source or supplied representation is unavailable.
`review_required`	Qualified review is required before interpretation, decision, commitment, or external use.
`service_unavailable`	Reserved for a later executable interface; not applicable to this documentation preview.

Data handling is not defined

Do not send production client data, confidential documents, credentials, or secrets through the public preview.

storage	Not yet defined
retention	Not yet defined
logging	Not yet defined
deletion	Not yet defined

Accepted data classes

Synthetic or intentionally generic data for public examples

Access

Availability	Documentation preview only
Eligibility	Developers, technical evaluators, institutional buyers, and implementation partners may discuss a bounded use case.
Onboarding	No credentials, SLA, pricing, or production integration are offered in V1.
Contact route	Email me

Synthetic evaluation set

Evidence

Each scenario is fictional or intentionally generic. Together they show a supported answer and the three ways this concept declines to give one — invalid input, abstention, and escalation to human review. No live request is sent.

Supported answer

Summarize a dated rule from a fictional approved source

Demonstrates citation-first research using an intentionally fictional source.

Request

{
  "example_id": "regulatory-intelligence-agent-happy-path",
  "question": "When does the fictional liquidity report become due?",
  "regulator_scope": [
    "Example Philippine Financial Regulator (fictional)"
  ],
  "date_scope": {
    "as_of": "2026-08-01"
  },
  "source_filters": [
    "SYN-REG-NOTICE-2026-04"
  ]
}

Response

{
  "example_id": "regulatory-intelligence-agent-happy-path",
  "status": "supported",
  "answer": "The fictional notice states that the liquidity report is due within ten calendar days after each month-end.",
  "citations": [
    {
      "source_id": "SYN-REG-NOTICE-2026-04",
      "title": "Example Liquidity Reporting Notice",
      "source_date": "2026-04-15",
      "locator": "Section 3"
    }
  ],
  "precedence_notes": [],
  "warnings": [
    "The source and regulator are fictional and provided only to demonstrate the documentation contract."
  ],
  "approval_state": "qualified_review_required_before_action"
}

Invalid input

Require a regulator or jurisdiction scope

Shows that the agent must not silently infer regulatory scope.

Request

{
  "example_id": "regulatory-intelligence-agent-invalid-input",
  "question": "What filing is due next month?",
  "regulator_scope": [],
  "date_scope": {
    "as_of": "2026-08-01"
  }
}

Response

{
  "example_id": "regulatory-intelligence-agent-invalid-input",
  "status": "invalid_input",
  "error": {
    "code": "REGULATOR_SCOPE_REQUIRED",
    "message": "Identify the regulator, jurisdiction, or approved source set to search.",
    "field": "regulator_scope"
  }
}

Abstains

Abstain when two fictional sources conflict and precedence is not established

Makes conflicts and unresolved precedence visible rather than forcing a conclusion.

Request

{
  "example_id": "regulatory-intelligence-agent-abstention",
  "question": "Which filing deadline applies?",
  "regulator_scope": [
    "Example Philippine Financial Regulator (fictional)"
  ],
  "date_scope": {
    "as_of": "2026-08-01"
  },
  "source_filters": [
    "SYN-REG-CIRCULAR-A",
    "SYN-REG-CIRCULAR-B"
  ]
}

Response

{
  "example_id": "regulatory-intelligence-agent-abstention",
  "status": "abstained",
  "answer": null,
  "citations": [
    {
      "source_id": "SYN-REG-CIRCULAR-A",
      "source_date": "2026-05-01",
      "locator": "Section 2"
    },
    {
      "source_id": "SYN-REG-CIRCULAR-B",
      "source_date": "2026-06-15",
      "locator": "Section 4"
    }
  ],
  "conflicts": [
    {
      "summary": "The fictional sources state different deadlines.",
      "precedence": "Not established from the approved source set."
    }
  ],
  "unresolved_questions": [
    "Which issuance supersedes the other?"
  ],
  "approval_state": "qualified_review_required"
}

Human review

Require qualified review before applying a rule to a specific incident

Shows that the agent must not infer material facts or make a regulatory decision.

Request

{
  "example_id": "regulatory-intelligence-agent-human-review",
  "question": "Must Example Company report this incident immediately?",
  "regulator_scope": [
    "Example Philippine Financial Regulator (fictional)"
  ],
  "date_scope": {
    "as_of": "2026-08-01"
  },
  "case_context": {
    "incident_type": "Not specified",
    "materiality": "Not assessed"
  }
}

Response

{
  "example_id": "regulatory-intelligence-agent-human-review",
  "status": "review_required",
  "answer": null,
  "citations": [],
  "unresolved_questions": [
    "What occurred?",
    "Which entity and licence type are involved?",
    "Has materiality been assessed?"
  ],
  "review_reason": "The caller has not supplied the facts needed to map a rule to the incident, and regulatory interpretation remains with qualified professionals.",
  "approval_state": "qualified_review_required"
}

What this record does not yet state

These facts have no value yet. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gap is visible before anyone relies on the record.

Fact	Group
Named owner	Lifecycle
Operational contract review	Lifecycle
Last review date	Lifecycle
Storage	Trust
Retention	Trust
Logging	Trust
Deletion	Trust
Allowed tools	Technical
Memory and persistence	Technical

Provenance

Source	Scope	Result
`SRC-REQ-001`	Purpose, input/output categories, proof requirement, examples, boundaries, and release posture.	Verified against supplied specification
`SRC-CAND-REGINTEL-001`	Executable contract, source behaviour, supported limits, and operational evidence.	Defer

Source products

Product	Source	Verification
RegIntel-related source corpus and reviewed product behaviour	`SRC-CAND-REGINTEL-001`	Not yet supplied

Version record

0.1.0-concept

Initial concept record derived from the approved content specification.

Last reviewed	Never reviewed
Content aligned	12 Aug 2026

Publication blockers

Approved source corpus not supplied
Coverage and review dates not validated
Owner and qualified reviewer not assigned
Data-handling posture not defined

Overview

Consider this when

Do not use it to

Who this is for

It is not for

Continue with the evidence you need.

Reference

Workflow

Approval points

Outputs

Error and limit states

Data handling is not defined

Accepted data classes

Access

Evidence

Summarize a dated rule from a fictional approved source

Request

Response

Require a regulator or jurisdiction scope

Request

Response

Abstain when two fictional sources conflict and precedence is not established

Request

Response

Require qualified review before applying a rule to a specific incident

Request

Response

What this record does not yet state

Provenance

Source products

0.1.0-concept

Publication blockers