Assess whether the board has been accurately briefed (5b0ba2)

SITUATION EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet arrived with a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose. Vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools in a city using a hiring-screen algorithm still has an evidence gap on whether the board has been accurately briefed.

DECISION Vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools in a city using a hiring-screen algorithm must choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact using EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet after a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. Authorize Policy or governance breach now; EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet already has the discriminator after a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose. 2. Keep Model defect in force until EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet is completed after a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose for vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools. 3. Treat EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet as Dual failure because both readings appear after a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose. 4. Refuse a AI Governance close: vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools does not have the decision the board has been turns on in EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Map the approved-use case to the system the board has been would bind. 2. Check intended purpose and inventory status against EU AI Act / exam-readiness language after a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose. 3. Map the approved-use case to the system the board has been would bind. 4. For this AI Governance Vendors and Agentic Systems file, read EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet against a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose and write the one fact that would move the board has been for vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools.

RECOMMENDATION Choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact on this AI Governance / Vendors and Agentic Systems packet (EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet after a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose). Lead with the AI Governance option EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet can support after a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose, then the two facts that force it, then the Monday action for vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools in a city using a hiring-screen algorithm.

COMMAND RETURNS - Bottom-line AI Governance option on the board has been, then the evidence in EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet, then the action for vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools - Hypothesis scorecard against EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet: supported / rejected / untestable - What changes the board has been if a new use case bolted onto a model approved for a narrower purpose is later withdrawn - Named option among Policy or governance breach, Model defect, Dual failure and the fact that kills the others