Internal auditors need a training plan that builds three abilities: reading an agent's record well enough to reconstruct any verdict, re-performing held decisions to test the reviewers, and challenging whether each depth was earned. This template sets the learning, the audit work used as practice, the assessment, and renewal, so the audit team can give an independent opinion on agents.
What is this plan for?
Audit's job with agents is assurance, not operation. Auditors rarely decide held actions, but they must judge whether the people who do are competent, whether the agent's bounds are right, and whether the record is complete. That needs hands-on understanding. An auditor who has never seen a held action cannot tell whether a 300-item sample of approvals looks healthy.
The plan ties learning to audit tasks. Each step produces a workpaper or a finding, not just a completion record. Every verdict is filed in an append-only record, so a trained auditor can rebuild any decision: which bound decided, which sources the agent cited and their provenance, who approved and whether their certificate was current on the day. The review method is covered in how internal auditors review an AI agent's decisions, and the time it takes in how long it takes to train internal auditors to supervise AI agents.
How do you fill it in?
One row per audit ability. In the "Audit task used as practice" column, choose real audit work from your plan, so training and assurance happen together. The assessment column separates external certification from the head of audit's own judgement.
The template
| Ability | Learning | Audit task used as practice | Output | Assessment | Signed off by | Renewal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vocabulary and the decision chain | ||||||
| Reconstructing a verdict from the record | ||||||
| Re-performing held decisions | ||||||
| Testing depth and certification decisions | ||||||
| Testing people's certificates and approval rights | ||||||
| Reviewing incidents |
A worked example
A hypothetical insurer's audit team of six, auditing a claims agent for the first time. Values are samples.
| Ability | Learning | Audit task used as practice | Output | Assessment | Signed off by | Renewal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vocabulary and the decision chain | Foundations, about 4 hours | Map the claims agent's capabilities and depths | Scoping memo | Foundations test | Audit manager | No expiry |
| Reconstructing a verdict | Operator modules on how a governed agent decides and reading the workspace | Trace 15 settlements end to end | Trace workpaper | Audit manager review | Audit manager | Annual |
| Re-performing held decisions | Operator module on human review; practicum | Re-perform 30 held settlements independently and compare with reviewers | Exceptions list | Practicum: Pryme assessor, at least 95 in every 100 decisions correct, no missed red line | Head of audit | Every 12 months |
| Testing depth decisions | Operator module on how a governed agent decides | Review the Attest evidence behind the last two depth increases | Finding or no finding | Head of audit review | Head of audit | At each audit |
| Testing approval rights | Operator module on running the rhythm | Check every approver in the sample held a current certificate on the day | Exceptions list | Audit manager | Audit manager | At each audit |
| Reviewing incidents | Operator module on when something goes wrong | Review the last incident's timeline against the record | Incident review note | Head of audit | Head of audit | At each incident |
The re-performance row is the heart of the plan. An auditor who decides 30 held settlements independently, before seeing what the reviewer did, learns two things at once: how the work is done, and whether the reviewers do it well. In this example, the comparison showed reviewers approving settlements supported by emailed repair invoices (external) without checking the approved repairer network. That became a finding, and the practicum taught the auditor to spot it first-hand.
The approval-rights row is quick and often revealing. Certificates lapse; rosters lag. Comparing approval dates in the record with certificate expiry dates on the register finds approvals made after a person's authority ended.
Auditors are as exposed to manipulated evidence as anyone; see how to train internal auditors to spot prompt injection and pressure. Keep the team consistent through calibration sessions for internal auditors. A market view is in AI agent training for internal auditors in insurance in India, and the team-wide sequence in training teams for AI agents.
Where the Academy fits
Pryme Intelligence Academy's Operator track gives auditors the same understanding as the reviewers they audit, including the practicum on real review decisions. Because certificates are issued through VerifyDoc.ai and checked at source, with lapsed or revoked certificates shown as such, auditors can test approval rights against an independent register.
Questions people ask
Does audit independence allow auditors to decide live held items?
Re-performing decisions for testing is fine; releasing live items is not, because it would make auditors part of the control. Arrange the practicum on items where the auditor's decision is compared, not acted on, or use a separate practice queue.
Should the head of audit be certified?
At least Foundations, and Operator if they will sign opinions on agents. Their judgement on findings depends on understanding what good looks like.
How often should agents be audited?
Base it on depth and risk. Agents acting at depth 4 deserve yearly audit at least, plus a review after any depth increase or incident.