01
The questionThe problem, as it is usually asked
A document that says what the system should log is not the log. Regulators and customers ask for the log, the rule it ran under, and proof that neither was rewritten.
What people ask
Which version of the rule was in force when the agent acted?
Does every agent that talks to a person carry the disclosure label?
Can we hand an auditor the evidence without giving them our systems?
Versioned mandates answer the first, a disclosure sweep the second, and a signed bundle the third. Each is evidence of one narrow fact, and none of them is a certificate of conformity.
02
RegulationThe rules and the business context
EU AI Act, record-keeping
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Articles 12 and 19AppliesDepends on the system’s risk class
High-risk AI systems must allow automatic recording of events over their lifetime, and providers must keep the logs for a period. Dates differ by role and class, so read the Act and ask counsel which apply to you.
Official text ↗EU AI Act, transparency
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Article 50AppliesDepends on the system’s use
People who interact with an AI system must be told so, unless it is obvious. The conformity sweep lists agents that may reach a person without a label, so gaps surface before a change ships.
Official text ↗Audit, customers and insurers
Business contextAppliesOngoing
Enterprise buyers now ask for the same three things about any agent that can move money or data: the rule, the log and an independent check. A signed bundle answers faster than screenshots.
Legal references are summarised and dated as of October 2026. They are given so you can see where the need comes from, not as legal advice. Read the official text, and ask counsel how it applies to you. Intramedial does not make any organisation compliant with any law.