An approval matrix for agent-prepared payments sets out, for each payment type and amount band, who must approve a payment an AI agent has prepared, how many approvers are needed, and which conditions force extra review. The agent prepares and holds; named people release. The template and a filled sample below can be used the same day.
Why does an agent-prepared payment need its own matrix?
Your existing approval matrix assumes a person prepared the payment, so the approver is the second pair of eyes. When an agent prepares it, the approver is often the first person to look. The matrix needs to reflect that, especially for payment types where the preparer used to catch problems by knowing the supplier.
The core question, who approves payments prepared by an AI agent, has a short answer: a named person with authority for that amount, who did not configure the agent. The matrix turns that answer into rows.
When do you use it?
Agree the matrix before an agent is allowed to prepare any payment, and review it quarterly or after any change in the agent's scope. Use it at three moments: when the agent assigns a held payment to an approver, when an approver checks they are allowed to release it, and when an auditor tests the control.
Auditors will look for evidence that preparation and approval were separate and that approvers had authority. How they think about this is covered in how auditors treat transactions prepared by an AI agent.
How do you fill in each field?
Payment type should be granular. Supplier invoices, refunds, payroll changes, intercompany transfers and one-off payments carry different risks. Payroll in particular deserves its own rows; see how to let an AI agent prepare payroll changes for approval.
Amount band uses your existing delegated limits. Do not invent new ones for agents.
Escalation triggers are conditions that move a payment to a higher row regardless of amount: a new supplier, bank details changed in the last 30 days, a payment outside the usual pattern, or several invoices from one supplier that together exceed a band. That last trigger catches split purchases; an agent is good at spotting them, as set out in detecting split purchases below approval limits.
Excluded approvers names anyone who cannot approve, such as the person who maintains the agent's configuration.
The approval matrix template
| Field | Guidance |
|---|---|
| Row ID | Reference, such as PM-03 |
| Payment type | Supplier invoice, refund, payroll change, intercompany, one-off |
| Amount band | Lower and upper limits, per payment |
| Agent depth for this row | Usually 2 (prepares and holds); never above 3 |
| Approvers required | Number and role |
| Named approvers | People holding the role |
| Escalation triggers | Conditions that move the payment up a row |
| Evidence the agent must attach | Invoice, PO, receipt, contract, variance note |
| Excluded approvers | Roles that may not approve this row |
| Release window | Latest time for approval before the payment run |
| Owner | Financial controller or equivalent |
A filled sample
A hypothetical distribution company with three amount bands.
| Row | Type | Band | Depth | Approvers | Escalation triggers | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PM-01 | Supplier invoice, three-way matched | Up to 5,000 | 2 | One AP supervisor | Bank details changed in last 30 days; supplier added in last 90 days | Invoice, PO, goods receipt |
| PM-02 | Supplier invoice, three-way matched | 5,001 to 50,000 | 2 | AP supervisor and financial controller | As PM-01, plus any price variance over tolerance | As PM-01 plus variance note |
| PM-03 | Supplier invoice | Over 50,000 | 2 | Financial controller and finance director | All | As PM-02 plus contract reference |
| PM-04 | Customer refund | Up to 1,000 | 2 | One credit control lead | Refund to a different account than paid from | Original receipt, refund reason |
| PM-05 | Payroll change | Any | 2 | Payroll manager and HR business partner | New starter with bank details matching an existing employee | Signed change form |
Excluded approvers on every row: the finance systems analyst who maintains the agent's brief and bounds.
Note that depth stays at 2 on every row. The agent prepares, attaches evidence and holds; it does not release. That is where the time saving comes from, as argued in a faster close comes from preparation, not automated approval.
Where Pryme fits
In Pryme, the matrix is the customer's own limits in the minimum chain. A payment that meets every bound is held for the named approver the matrix specifies, and the held verdict records which row applied. An external claim, such as bank details in an emailed invoice, cannot authorise a payment. More in the finance guide, books you can audit.
Questions people ask
Can low-value payments be released by the agent without approval?
Some firms allow depth 3 for very small, fully matched payments to long-standing suppliers. If you do, cap it tightly, exclude any supplier with changed details, and sample-check releases weekly.
What if a named approver is away?
The matrix should name a deputy for each role. Payments should wait for the deputy rather than drop to a lower approval row.
Does the matrix replace our delegated authority policy?
No. It applies that policy to agent-prepared payments. If the two conflict, the policy wins and the matrix is corrected.