Detect scope
Start with the suspect lot, tool, process window, revision or station.
First Agent · Containment
A suspect lot is found. How far does it reach?
Today, defining the containment scope means days of engineers reconciling MES, QMS and spreadsheets - and a scope you still cannot fully defend. Containment composes the affected-unit set from governed evidence, flags the gaps and proposes a cited package to the accountable human.
FIGURE 1 - THE CONTAINMENT ANSWER
QUALITY HEAD
Which units could share the torque condition?
ANSWER · CITED214 units require containment
173 units are supported by complete genealogy and inspection evidence [E-102] [E-104]. Hold 41 additional units while the scan gap remains unresolved [G-17].
GAP
41 units lack a confirming scan between 05:47 and 06:02.
Awaiting approval · Head of QualityAgent stopped at R3
The answer distinguishes supported scope from unresolved evidence and stops before action.
The Containment Flow
From suspect condition to defensible package.
The workflow is narrow by design: investigate one consequential question, expose the evidence and hand the decision to the accountable human.
Compose units
Build the affected-unit set from genealogy, calibration and inspection evidence.
Find gaps
Make missing scans, late evidence and system disagreements explicit.
Propose package
Deliver a cited containment scope for human review and approval.
HUMAN APPROVAL BUILT IN
The agent investigates, explains and recommends. The accountable person owns the containment decision.
One Substrate · Many Agents
The next industrial worker starts with the same evidence.
Each agent performs a defined job while deepening the governed memory that makes the next workflow easier to support.
Containment
Define a defensible affected-unit set, flag evidence gaps and propose a cited package for approval.
Reconcile
Detect cross-system disagreement and bring the unresolved evidence to an accountable human.
Quality Evidence
Prepare cited investigation packages with facts, gaps and operating context attached.
Audit
Assemble the evidence an audit question requires and preserve where every claim came from.
Maintenance
Ground maintenance work in the equipment, production and operator evidence that supports it.
Expansion Logic
One agent lands. The operating layer deepens.
01One agent
→Containment proves a defined workflow.
02More fact classes
→The governed memory expands.
03More agents
→New jobs reuse the foundation.
04More lines
→Evidence coverage compounds.
05More plants
Governance remains explicit.
How We Engage
One workflow, one plant, one partnership.
Expanded only by evidence. The engagement grows the same way agent authority does - one earned step at a time.
Walk through it
Bring a real scenario - a past containment works well. We run the loop on it: evidence, citations, gaps, the approval gate. No commitment, and no data leaves your plant.
Deploy together
One line, one workflow. The Containment agent and the Substrate foundation are deployed together, in your plant, on your infrastructure - without pausing production.
Operate and earn
The agent observes, explains and recommends. Your accountable people approve. Authority expands one rung at a time, only with your sign-off.
Expand on evidence
More fact classes, more agents, more lines - each step justified by the operating record, not a roadmap slide.
Authority Ladder
Capability can move fast. Authority moves deliberately.
Evidence, provenance and time-effective context make an answer defensible. Declared authority boundaries determine what the agent may do with it.
Autonomy is earned, not assumed.
Bring the containment wound.
We will walk through the evidence, the gaps, the cited answer and the human approval boundary.