Claim

Governance teams review prompts because runtimes expose no compiled policy surface—only natural-language instructions.

Receipt

• Registry entry: BH-RL-2026-0013 in research/registry.json
• Compile output: this evidence surface (BH-RL-2026-0013/evidence/) via compile-evidence-publications.mjs
• Pipeline: research:compile · generated 2026-06-29T21:00:40.776Z · source afd302e4eb1d
• Canonical publication: /essays/governance-teams-review-prompts/ (essay)
• Source lineage: Foothill essay
• This essay supports citation and search for: Why AI Governance Teams Review Prompts Instead of Policies
• Reader takeaway: Prompt review is a rational symptom of missing Governance Compilation infrastructure.
• Summary: Why governance programs center on prompt review: prompts are the only governance surface the runtime exposes. What changes when policies compile into checkable constraints.
• Why now: Category terms need retrieval surfaces beyond the canonical position paper.
• Foothill essay supporting the Governance Compilation category: Why AI Governance Teams Review Prompts Instead of Policies
• Thesis: Why governance programs center on prompt review: prompts are the only governance surface the runtime exposes. What changes when policies compile into checkable constraints.
• Implementation mechanisms remain open research.
• Linked artifact: Why Enterprise Governance Doesn't Compile (BH-RL-2026-0009) → /position-papers/why-enterprise-governance-doesnt-compile/
• Linked artifact: What Is Governance Compilation? (BH-RL-2026-0010) → /essays/what-is-governance-compilation/
• Linked artifact: Semantic Governance for Agentic Systems (BH-RL-2026-0005) → /research/semantic-governance/

Homepage pilot: Governed Portfolio Atlas · Machine graph: atlas.json

Boundary

Status

Publication status

Review candidate

Authority class

Review candidate

Revision

initial-foothill-essay

Maturity

Foothill essay v1.0.