The question isn’t what she can do.
It’s what she’s authorized to do.

Each serious objection to an AI employee is the same objection wearing different clothes: what happens when it does something I didn’t sanction? The honest answer is not “she’s very accurate.” The honest answer is that accuracy is not a governance model, and a system that relies on a model behaving well has no answer at all.

Sabina is built the other way around. Authority is a thing you hand her, in writing, one capability at a time — and the grant is a separate object from her judgment about what to do. This folio carries two chapters: the gate, walked through; and the rules you write once.

IIIWhat she is not authorized to do

The gate, walked through.

Take one request and follow it. A caller asks for a discount. Here is what happens between the asking and anything at all being done about it.

1. The request arrives. It is written down first — who asked, for what, on which job — before it is acted on, because the record is the thing each later step is checked against.
2. It is checked against the grants she holds. Not against her judgment of what a reasonable person would do. Against the sentences you sent her: which capabilities you named, and which treatment you gave each. The check is performed on each action, and it reads your words, not her inference about them.
3. One of three things follows. Inside a grant that lets her act, she acts, and the record names the grant. Inside a grant that requires a yes, she proposes the specific act and waits. Outside each grant she holds, it comes back to you as a question — not as an action taken on a guess.
4. The record closes the entry. What was asked, what she was cleared to do, what she did, and which grant covered it. When you ask why something went out, the answer is a document, not a reconstruction.

The point of the walk is what is missing from it. At no step does what she has learned about your business widen what she is authorized to do in it. That separation is a chapter of its own, on whose she is.

Six treatments

Granted against one capability at a time.

• Watch only

  She observes and records the ground truth. She does not compose or act.

• Compose only

  She drafts. Nothing leaves without a person sending it.

• Per-act approval

  She proposes a specific action and waits for a yes on that act.

• Scoped autonomy

  She acts inside a boundary you wrote, and outside it she stops.

• Owns the outcome

  The result is hers to deliver, and the record shows how she delivered it.

• Coordinates work

  She directs the sequencing of work across people and steps.

These are not ranks and there is no order to them. A disposition is granted against a single capability, so on any given morning she may own the outcome on collections follow-up and be watch-only on pricing. Nothing she does earns her a promotion. Authority moves when you move it, and only when you move it.

IVWhat you tell her once

Plain-language rules. Ratified by sending. Revocable the same way.

You write it to her in plain English, the way you’d tell a new hire what they’re cleared to handle. What matters is what that sentence then is: a text, not a state. It is ratified by the act of sending it — there is no second step where someone translates it into settings — and from that moment the words you sent are the governing words. They can be read back, quoted in an argument, and shown to someone who wasn’t in the room, none of which is true of a checkbox somebody ticked in March.

Revocation is the same motion in reverse, and it takes effect when you send it. You tell her once; you do not maintain her. There is no permissions matrix to maintain and no admin console to get wrong. A rule stands until you withdraw it, and a rule you never wrote is a rule she does not hold.

What this is not Approving something once does not make it hers from then on. A yes to one act is a yes to that act. Standing authority is a sentence you wrote, never a habit she picked up.