Scenario 01 · Operation Mandate

Give one agent one exact pricing power.

Alice authorizes PricePilot to set the promotional price of one Flower Shop Offer between 100 and 300 PLN. The agent remains the actor. The Mandate explains whose authority it exercises.

Run in Playground Read Mandates

Initial graph

Target documentFlower Shop Offer · currentPrice 150 PLN

Owner roleAlice · MyOS principal Timeline Channel

Agent rolePricePilot · KYA provider Timeline Channel

Mandate targetownerChannel · setPromotionalPrice

Request limitamount minimum 100 · maximum 300 PLN

The two requests

Near-identical actions produce different results for an explicit reason.

Applied

PricePilot requests 175 PLN.

The target document, owner channel, operation, actor, active Mandate, and request constraints match. The offer changes from 150 to 175 PLN.

ActorPricePilot remains the actor on the Timeline Entry.

AuthorityAlice appears in onBehalfOf; the exact Mandate is referenced.

ResultThe document records the new price and new exact state identity.

Withheld

PricePilot requests 450 PLN.

The same agent, target, and operation are present, but 450 PLN exceeds the Mandate’s declared maximum. The offer remains at its current price.

AttemptThe provider can retain the denied attempt as attributable security evidence.

TargetThe invalid request is not transformed into a permitted one.

ResultNo authorized operation reaches the target document.

Why this is different from an API token

The permission is part of a processed document lifecycle.

The Mandate has exact content, participant roles, a guarantor, confirmation and activation events, request constraints, revocation, and a state at the action time. A later activation cannot authorize an earlier action, and later termination does not erase an action that was valid before termination.

The agent never receives “everything Alice can do.” It receives one named operation through one named authority channel on one logical target document under explicit request constraints.

Direct versus Mandated

Agent’s own operationAgent Timeline Entry → operation bound to the agent’s own channel.

Alice’s operationAgent Timeline Entry → active Mandate → operation bound to Alice’s channel.

Human-only operationThe document may require a Principal Actor and an interactive source; no Mandate need make every action delegable.

What must be checked

Five proofs answer five different questions.

Entry attributionWhich exact agent and source submitted the request?

Target matchWhich document, channel, and operation are named?

Mandate stateWas the authority active at the entry’s timestamp?

Request constraintsDoes 175—or 450—fit the allowed shape and range?

Document preconditionIs the target still in the state against which the action was authorized?

A BlueId alone does not answer all five questions. It proves exact content identity. Provider evidence, Mandate state, request validation, and target-state checks supply the rest.

Run the proof

Try 175. Try 450. Revoke the Mandate. Try again.

The Playground lets you inspect the Offer, the Mandate, the agent Timeline, the human role, and the reason each operation is applied or withheld.

Open pricing scenario Open Mandate quickstart

What the browser model claims

It demonstrates the architecture and interaction locally. It does not claim a live KYA provider, production Timeline receipts, or release-certificate execution in the browser.

Concept modelState, authority, and outcomes are simulated for explanation.

Normative sourceUse specifications and exact package artifacts for implementation claims.