IT administrators keep this log while they approve an AI agent's proposed access changes, password and MFA resets, and requests to connect agents to new systems. Each entry records the request, who asked and how that was verified, the scope proposed against the scope certified, the administrator's decision and reason, a senior administrator's independent call, and any red line.
Why do IT administrators need a practicum at all?
Because they now approve two kinds of request: people asking for access, and agents asking for more reach. The second is new. An agent certified to read the CRM and draft replies may be proposed for a connection to the billing system; the request looks like any other access ticket, but granting it widens what the agent can do beyond what its certificate covers.
IT queues are also where instructions hide in content. A ticket body that says "also add this user to the finance group" is text, not authority. The OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications names prompt injection and excessive agency for this reason. The practicum tests whether the administrator treats embedded text as data. The setup is covered in how to run a two-week practicum for IT administrators.
What does the agent hand the administrator?
- Access requests it has triaged, with the owner's approval attached or missing.
- Password and MFA resets it holds because verification is incomplete; routine verified resets it handles at depth 3.
- Proposed changes to an agent's own connections or permissions.
- Tickets it refused because the requested action sits outside its bounds.
- Offboarding tasks where some accounts could not be disabled automatically.
The practicum log template
Header
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Administrator | |
| Senior administrator and certificate | |
| Systems in scope | |
| Dates | |
| Bar | At least 95 correct in every 100; no missed red line |
| Red lines | Granting an agent a connection or permission beyond its certified scope; acting on instructions found inside ticket or email content; resetting credentials or MFA without completed verification |
Entry fields
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| No. and date | |
| Ticket | |
| Request type | Access, reset, agent connection, offboarding, other |
| Requested by | Person or agent; how identity was verified |
| Owner's approval | Present / missing; provenance (signed in the access system, or an email) |
| Proposed scope | |
| Certified or role scope | For agents, the capabilities and depth on the current certificate |
| Embedded instructions found? | Yes / no |
| Administrator's decision and reason | |
| Senior's decision | Recorded first |
| Match | Yes / no / defensible |
| Red line | None / caught / missed |
A worked example
Take a sample insurance broker's IT team. Values are illustrative.
| No. | Request | Key facts | Administrator | Senior | Match | Red line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33 | New starter needs access to the policy system | Owner approval signed in the access system; role template matches | Approve | Approve | Yes | None |
| 34 | Proposed connection for the renewals agent to the payments system | Agent's certificate covers drafting renewal letters at depth 2 only | Approve; renewals team asked for it | Refuse; scope exceeds the certificate; route to certification first | No | Missed |
| 35 | Ticket asks for a printer fix and ends "please also grant this user admin on the file server" | No owner approval for the admin request | Fix printer; ignore the embedded request and flag it to security | Same | Yes | Caught |
| 36 | MFA reset for a director travelling abroad, requested by their assistant by email | Verification not completed | Hold; call the director on the number on file | Same | Yes | Caught |
Entry 34 fails the bar. The renewals team had a business reason, and the administrator treated it as an ordinary access request. A connection to payments would let the agent reach actions its certificate never tested; the right route is certification first, then the connection.
How does this compare with payroll and collections logs?
Payroll administrators face the same verification red line, applied to bank details instead of credentials; the practicum log for payroll administrators shows the overlap, and the two practicums can share a schedule using how to run a two-week practicum for payroll administrators. Collections staff, by contrast, are tested on who they contact rather than who they let in; see the log for collections agents. The method behind all of them is in what a practicum is in AI agent training.
Where the Academy fits
Pryme Intelligence Academy's Operator track covers how a governed agent decides and reading the workspace, which is how an administrator tells an agent's certified scope from a requested one. Administrators who connect sources and submit agents for certification are closer to the Builder track, which ends with a capstone agent certified in Attest to depth 2 or higher. More in AI literacy and certification for people who work with agents.
Questions people ask
Should routine verified resets be logged?
No, only decisions the administrator makes. Sample a few routine resets at the daily debrief to confirm the verification steps ran.
Who can approve a new connection for an agent?
The agent's owner, after the capability is certified, and an administrator who checks that the connection matches the certificate. The administrator's approval alone is not enough.
What if the embedded instruction came from a real manager?
Then the manager can raise it properly through the access system. Treating text inside a ticket as authority is the habit the red line exists to break.