Direct answer
AI Agent Accountability, in this source register, is limited to the following inspected scope. Accountability according to role, traceability, and systematic risk management. Logging, oversight, incident/corrective duties, and deployer obligations for covered systems. The answer carries the source boundaries forward and does not infer authority from a neighboring topic.
Source register and jurisdiction/version notes
Order authorities by role, version, jurisdiction, and freshness rather than treating every link as interchangeable.
A source list is useful only when each source’s scope and boundary remain attached.
Applied scope: Accountability according to role, traceability, and systematic risk management. Logging, oversight, incident/corrective duties, and deployer obligations for covered systems.
Definition and operating context
The canonical concept owner is maha-policy. This route may apply governance; it cannot redefine or inherit the authority of its canonical owner.
This property may publish current-law summaries, policy evidence, Maha proposals labelled as proposals. It must not publish legal advice or proposal presented as enacted law.
Evidence and exact locators
OECD AI Principle 1.5: Accountability — Principle 1.5. Establishes: Accountability according to role, traceability, and systematic risk management.
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Artificial Intelligence Act) — Articles 12–14, 20, and 26. Establishes: Logging, oversight, incident/corrective duties, and deployer obligations for covered systems.
What the evidence does not establish
The principle does not allocate liability in a particular jurisdiction.
Most provisions are role- and risk-class-specific; they do not govern every agent.
This route must not claim legal advice.
This route must not claim proposal presented as enacted law.
Related definitions and applications
same-topic-application: https://policy.mahastrategies.com/policy/ai-agent-accountability/definition
canonical-family-owner-definition-first: https://policy.mahastrategies.com/policy/tool-governance/definition
same-topic-application: https://policy.mahastrategies.com/policy/ai-agent-accountability/mechanisms
same-topic-application: https://policy.mahastrategies.com/policy/ai-agent-accountability/uncertainty
property-home: https://policy.mahastrategies.com/
same-topic-application: https://policy.mahastrategies.com/policy/ai-agent-accountability/comparison
same-topic-application: https://policy.mahastrategies.com/policy/ai-agent-accountability/current-law
Questions this page can answer
What does AI Agent Accountability mean in this bounded context?
AI Agent Accountability, in this source register, is limited to the following inspected scope. Accountability according to role, traceability, and systematic risk management. Logging, oversight, incident/corrective duties, and deployer obligations for covered systems. The answer carries the source boundaries forward and does not infer authority from a neighboring topic.
Which inspected sources establish the sources answer?
OECD AI Principle 1.5: Accountability (principle page inspected 2026-09-05), at Principle 1.5, supports accountability according to role, traceability, and systematic risk management. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Artificial Intelligence Act) (OJ L, 12 July 2024), at Articles 12–14, 20, and 26, supports logging, oversight, incident/corrective duties, and deployer obligations for covered systems.
What does the evidence not establish?
The principle does not allocate liability in a particular jurisdiction. Most provisions are role- and risk-class-specific; they do not govern every agent. Property boundary: This route may apply governance; it cannot redefine or inherit the authority of its canonical owner.
Which canonical definition must be read first?
Read the maha-policy definition at https://policy.mahastrategies.com/policy/tool-governance/definition first. The present page applies that definition through its narrower route role.
What change would require this page to be revised or withdrawn?
Re-evaluate this page when a cited source, locator, governing instrument, local implementation, or canonical definition changes. Publication also requires a matching exact-revision review and active canonical release.