PAT-0230
Authority Shadowing
A structural condition where a declared authority is functionally overridden by another authority without an explicit override rule.
Primary Lenses
Authority Overlay Lens
Maps declared authority hierarchies onto observed structure to detect absence, override, or conflict.
Lens Application
The Authority Overlay Lens is a strong inspection mechanism for Authority Shadowing because it places formal authority claims beside actual decision, escalation, and enforcement behavior. It helps identify where an undeclared authority may be directing outcomes despite another authority being named.
Inspect For
- Declared authority bypassed in recurring decisions
- Escalations routed to a different actor or structure
- Enforcement behavior inconsistent with formal hierarchy
- Informal approval paths overriding stated authority
Avoid
Treat observed override signals as prompts for deeper inspection, not confirmation of Authority Shadowing, until corroborating structure, records, or behavior are identified.
Secondary Lenses
Conflict Lens
Detects mutually incompatible constraints, claims, states, or declarations that cannot be simultaneously satisfied.
Lens Application
Conflict Lens applies indirectly to Authority Shadowing by identifying places where declared authority conflicts with operational decisions, enforcement behavior, or routing paths. It can highlight tensions suggesting that one authority may be constrained, displaced, or functionally overridden by another.
Inspect For
- Conflicting decision rights between named and acting authorities
- Escalations that bypass the declared authority
- Rules that assign authority while workflows route control elsewhere
- Outcomes that follow informal authority over formal designation
Avoid
Treat conflict signals as inspection leads, not sufficient evidence that Authority Shadowing is present.
Reconciliation Lens
Evaluates whether structural changes align with declared authority updates, version changes, or reconciliation rules.
Lens Application
The Reconciliation Lens applies indirectly to Authority Shadowing by examining whether functional authority changes were reconciled with declared authority records. It can surface gaps where a new actor, system, or workflow overrides the named authority without corresponding versioning, update history, or reconciliation logic.
Inspect For
- Authority behavior that changed without declared authority updates
- Version history that omits practical override changes
- Reconciliation rules that fail to address competing authorities
- Structural changes routed through an undeclared decision source
Avoid
Treat missing reconciliation evidence as a signal for further inspection, not proof that Authority Shadowing is present.
Primary Issue Matches
Supporting Issue Matches
Agent Gets Conflicting Tool Authority
An agent receives conflicting authority signals about whether, when, or how it may use a tool, connector, function, or integration.
Behavior Does Not Match Declared Role
The AI or agent behaves outside, below, or differently from the role, authority, responsibility, or permission posture declared for it.
Conflicting Instructions From Different Authorities
Instructions from different sources, roles, policies, prompts, tools, or workflow authorities conflict without a clear rule for which one governs.
Permissions Conflict After Being Combined
Permissions, approvals, roles, policies, or authority rules that seem valid separately conflict when combined in the same workflow or AI action.
Same Case Has Conflicting Policies
The same case appears to be governed by multiple policies, rules, or standards that point to incompatible outcomes.
Tool Rules and Prompt Rules Conflict
Tool, connector, function, or MCP rules conflict with prompt instructions, causing the AI or agent to face incompatible requirements.