AI agents are rapidly transitioning from experimental phases to production within financial institutions, as banks and fintech companies explore their potential for various applications including onboarding, fraud triage, transaction monitoring, and customer communication. However, as the demand for model validation increases, model risk teams are finding themselves stretched thin. The implementation of agentic AI in regulated environments poses significant challenges, particularly in ensuring that governance and evaluation are integrated from the outset.
The discourse around these systems has primarily centered on their capabilities—such as reasoning across complex data, orchestrating workflows, and generating narratives. Yet the pivotal question remains: What occurs when an AI agent experiences a hallucination? This issue brings to light the autonomy accountability gap that arises when institutions adopt systems that operate with a degree of independence, often outpacing the development of appropriate accountability frameworks.
Unlike traditional financial software, which is deterministic and predictable, AI agents function as probabilistic systems that produce varying results from the same inputs. This unpredictability necessitates ongoing measurement and oversight, as emphasized by the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s AI Risk Management Framework. Conventional banking infrastructure, which relies on consistent logic, cannot be applied directly to these AI systems, which can yield different outcomes based on minor variations in prompts or data inputs.
In consumer applications, a “mostly correct” output may be tolerable. However, in the realm of financial compliance, such inaccuracies can have serious implications. If an AI agent misrepresents a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR), omits vital investigative steps, or delivers inconsistent results, it triggers significant control failures. Institutions must be prepared to justify their decisions under model risk management expectations set by regulatory bodies like the Federal Reserve.
This situation creates an autonomy accountability gap: while institutions are adopting increasingly autonomous systems, the frameworks for accountability often lag behind. Governance is frequently treated as an afterthought, added only after an agent’s capabilities have been established. In low-risk software, controls can be retrofitted, but with agentic systems, risks can evolve over time, complicating oversight.
As such, regulatory expectations emphasize that guardrails, evaluation, and ongoing monitoring must be integral components of the system’s lifecycle rather than afterthoughts. If an organization cannot ensure the safety of its AI agent, it should reconsider deployment. Implementing effective guardrails is not about stifling innovation; it’s about recognizing that the probabilistic nature of these systems requires robust technical controls to operate within deterministic regulatory frameworks.
Establishing a structured evaluation and supervision framework before launch is critical. Evaluation should not merely be a quality assurance phase but a core aspect of the AI system itself, enabling the measurement of behavior across workflows and the detection of drift over time. Research benchmarks for large language model (LLM) agents highlight that single-turn evaluations fail to capture significant failure modes inherent in interactive systems.
A production-ready agent must incorporate three essential layers: deterministic controls, observability, and continuous optimization. Deterministic controls, or “safety rails,” establish unbreakable constraints within which the agent must operate. These constraints ensure that regulatory obligations are met consistently, even if the underlying model experiences drift or produces unexpected results.
Observability, or the traceability matrix, provides the necessary measures to track system performance and decision-making processes. Institutions must be able to reconstruct how an output was generated, including all relevant data inputs and reasoning steps. This transparency transforms AI operations from opaque processes into auditable workflows, reinforcing accountability in the face of regulatory scrutiny.
The final layer, continuous optimization, involves regularly evaluating agent performance against benchmark datasets or real-world cases. This may include using a secondary governed model to review the primary agent’s outputs for accuracy and compliance, effectively identifying issues before they reach customers or regulators. This “model reviewing model” strategy helps to address problems like hallucinations or compliance gaps, ensuring ongoing accountability.
As regulatory bodies increasingly scrutinize the governance of AI-driven decisions, financial institutions must adapt to new supervisory guidance that mandates rigorous validation, monitoring, and control of models influencing risk decisions. Globally, organizations like the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision are examining how digitalization and machine learning reshape risk profiles, emphasizing the need for governance to evolve in tandem with technological capabilities.
Ultimately, institutions deploying agentic systems without a solid evaluation framework may find themselves compelled to explain not only the intended functionality of such systems but also why they lacked sufficient oversight. The organizations that will thrive in this new landscape will be those that prioritize the careful integration of control, monitoring, and optimization from the outset, rather than those that rush to deploy. The future focus of the industry will be on the ability to manage and defend the behaviors of these systems effectively, rather than simply on their capabilities alone.
See also
Finance Ministry Alerts Public to Fake AI Video Featuring Adviser Salehuddin Ahmed
Bajaj Finance Launches 200K AI-Generated Ads with Bollywood Celebrities’ Digital Rights
Traders Seek Credit Protection as Oracle’s Bond Derivatives Costs Double Since September
BiyaPay Reveals Strategic Upgrade to Enhance Digital Finance Platform for Global Users
MVGX Tech Launches AI-Powered Green Supply Chain Finance System at SFF 2025
