Credit analysts working with an AI agent need a plan organised around what the agent prepares: spread financials, a draft credit memo, covenant checks and a suggested rating. For each, the plan sets what the analyst must learn to check, how it is assessed, and who signs off. The credit decision and its reasons stay with the analyst.
What is this plan for?
Credit agents do the assembly work. They read financial statements and management accounts, spread them into the lender's template, pull bureau and registry data, check covenants on existing facilities, and draft a memo with a suggested rating. Each of these runs at depth 1 or 2. In most lenders, nothing an agent prepares in credit goes beyond depth 2, because the decision to lend is the lender's judgement, and where it concerns natural persons in the EU, creditworthiness assessment and credit scoring are listed as high-risk under the EU AI Act.
The analyst's risk is subtle. A tidy memo, consistent with the numbers, can still rest on a management account the borrower prepared themselves (declared) rather than audited accounts (signed by an auditor). The plan trains analysts to look under the memo. Time to competence is covered in how long it takes to train credit analysts to supervise AI agents.
How do you fill it in?
One row per agent capability the analyst will review. In "What the analyst must check", write the checks that would catch the agent's typical errors for that capability. Keep the assessment tied to live applications wherever you can.
The template
| Phase | Agent capability in focus | Depth | What the analyst must check | Learning | Assessment | Signed off by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | ||||||
| 3 | ||||||
| 4 | ||||||
| Certification | ||||||
| Renewal |
A worked example
A hypothetical business bank's mid-market credit team. Values are samples.
| Phase | Agent capability in focus | Depth | What the analyst must check | Learning | Assessment | Signed off by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Reading statements; vocabulary | 1 | Which documents the agent used, and the provenance of each: audited accounts (signed), management accounts (declared), registry filings (signed) | Foundations, about 4 hours | Foundations test set in lending | Credit manager |
| 2 | Spreading financials | 2 | Line mapping for unusual items; one-off income treated as recurring; restatements between years | Operator modules on how a governed agent decides and human review | Shadow: re-spreads three applications and compares | Senior analyst |
| 3 | Covenant checks on existing facilities | 2 | Definitions match the facility agreement, not a generic template; the test date and period are right | Operator modules on teaching the agent and keeping knowledge current | Shadow: checks ten covenant results the agent prepared | Senior analyst |
| 4 | Draft credit memo and suggested rating | 2 | Every claim in the memo traces to a cited source; the rating rationale is the analyst's own | Operator modules on when something goes wrong | Writes own rationale for five memos before reading the agent's | Credit manager |
| Certification | All of the above on live applications | 2 | As above | Written exam: 40 questions, 60 minutes, pass at 32 | Two-week practicum; Pryme assessor; at least 95 in every 100 decisions correct, no missed red line | Pryme assessor, then head of credit |
| Renewal | Any new capability | 2 | Changes since the previous certificate | Update module and short quiz | Quiz | Credit manager |
Phase 4 contains the most useful habit. Analysts write their own view of the rating before reading the agent's. If they read the agent's first, they anchor on it, and over time the team's judgement drifts toward whatever the agent suggests. Writing first, then comparing, keeps the analyst's judgement independent and gives the weekly review useful disagreements to examine.
Red lines for this team:
- Never present management accounts as if they were audited in a memo going to committee.
- Never let the agent's suggested rating stand without a rationale in the analyst's own words.
- Never pass an application where the agent flagged a mismatch between registry data and the borrower's own statements without resolving it.
Borrowers in difficulty sometimes add notes to their submissions intended to influence whoever reads them, and analysts need practice spotting them; see how to train credit analysts to spot prompt injection and pressure. Keep the team aligned through calibration sessions for credit analysts. Neighbouring plans are the training plan for credit controllers and the training plan for fraud analysts. The overall order is in training teams for AI agents.
Where the Academy fits
Pryme Intelligence Academy sets module tests in the learner's own industry and role, so a credit analyst's questions come from lending, not generic cases. The Operator certificate lasts 12 months and can be checked by number or QR code, which lets a credit committee see that the analyst presenting an agent-prepared memo was certified on the day.
Questions people ask
Should credit agents ever run above depth 2?
Rarely. Some lenders let an agent complete routine covenant monitoring at depth 3 once it is proven on their own facilities. Credit decisions themselves stay with people.
Do senior analysts need the full plan?
Yes, with a shorter shadow phase if their record supports it. Senior analysts are the most likely to skim an agent's memo, because they trust their own pattern recognition.
How does the plan handle new joiners?
New analysts follow phases 1 to 4 before certification, and spend longer in shadow, since they are learning credit and the agent at the same time.