Your AI agents take real actions. Who's accountable when one gets it wrong?
Agents now send money, change configs, and delete data — at machine speed, without a human on each step. InterceptAI is the independent layer at the action boundary that catches the costly mistake, holds it for a human, and writes a tamper-evident record of what was authorized versus what actually happened.
Intercept · score · enforce (allow · hold · block · wrap) · record — in under 40 ms of added overhead for a low-consequence action.
The gap nobody owns
The harm isn't clever attacks. It's authorized-looking mistakes.
An agent misreads intent, hallucinates, or takes a wrong-but-permitted action — a coding agent that wiped a production database, a support bot that invented a refund policy the company was forced to honor. Even a sub-5% error rate across millions of actions is a large pile of expensive wrong outcomes, and reliability degrades further across long runs.
Machine speed, no reviewer
The write path is now automated. The gap between an agent taking an irreversible action and a human noticing is a genuinely new risk category.
Attack tools miss it
Agent-security stacks keep attackers out of agents they already govern. An authorized-but-catastrophic action has no attack signature to catch.
No provable record
Without a tamper-evident account of intent versus action, there is nothing to satisfy a regulator, settle a dispute, or let an insurer price the risk.
How it works
One independent plane at the agent's action boundary.
InterceptAI sits between the agent and its tools (over MCP). Every consequential action passes through four steps before any side effect happens — and each one is recorded.
Intercept
Catch each tool call at the boundary — independent of the agent platform and the tool.
Score
Rate the consequence by irreversibility, blast radius, and drift from the delegated intent.
Enforce
Apply your policy — and pick the right response for the consequence.
Record
Write an append-only, hash-chained entry: what was authorized, what ran, and who decided.
If scoring or the record is ever unavailable, a high-consequence action holds by default — it fails safe, never silently open.
Built for two teams
The engineers wiring the agents, and the people who answer for them.
For platform & AI engineers
Governance you drop in at the boundary.
- Sits on MCP — front your tool servers; no rewrite of the agent or the tools.
- A real policy engine — allow, hold for a human, block, or wrap a write so it can be undone.
- Fast path stays fast — a load-tested ≤ 40 ms P50 added-overhead budget for a low-consequence action.
- Self-host first — Docker Compose or Helm, your Postgres, your identity provider. Nothing phones home.
For security & compliance
The evidence a reviewer signs off on.
- Tamper-evident record — append-only, hash-chained, immutability enforced at the database layer, not just in code.
- Third-party provable — a signed export and an external anchor let an auditor verify the record without trusting us.
- Tenant isolation & redaction — per-tenant separation with a leakage test suite; arguments never land in the record or the logs.
- SOC-2 groundwork — a security policy, threat model, and control-to-evidence map, plus SIEM export to your stack.
What it does
Four pillars — consequence, reversibility, record, and rail.
Consequence-first scoring
Flag actions by irreversibility, blast radius, and deviation from delegated intent — the catastrophic-but-permitted action that signature engines miss.
Reversibility layer
Wrap high-impact writes in snapshot-and-undo, hold money movement, and intercept pre-commit where true undo is impossible.
Tamper-evident record
A portable, hash-chained oversight log of authorized-versus-actual — engineered to the “reasonable oversight” standard, across multi-agent chains.
Insurance & dispute rail
The underwriting-grade data layer that lets carriers price and settle agent risk — the wedge that makes this infrastructure, not a feature.
Why now
Provable oversight just became table stakes.
Liability shifted to the deployer
The emerging “reasonable oversight” standard makes the deploying organization liable unless it can prove robust monitoring and controls. Audit trails are legal armor now, not hygiene.
Insurers can't underwrite the gap
Coverage for agent risk is arriving, but there is no standardized, tamper-evident record of what an agent was authorized to do versus what it did — nothing to price or settle a claim against.
The referee shouldn't be the player
Independence is the point. The accountability layer should not be owned by the vendor that governs the agent — which is exactly the quadrant no incumbent occupies.
Trust by construction
The record is the product — so it's built to be believed.
The oversight ledger is append-only and hash-chained; its immutability is enforced by the database, not by convention. A signed export verifies offline, and a periodic external anchor makes tampering detectable by a third party — without our keys.
Fail safe, not open
If scoring or the ledger is unavailable, a high-consequence action holds — it never silently proceeds.
Least privilege & redaction
A two-role database the app can append to but never rewrite; sensitive arguments are redacted before they ever reach the record or the logs.
Yours to run
Self-host on your own infrastructure and identity provider, scale horizontally, back up and restore with the chain still verifying.
Get started
Put an accountability layer in front of your agents.
Self-host InterceptAI today, or talk to us about design-partner access and the insurance rail. Independent by design — for the team that has to answer for what the agent did.