Overview
LLMs are probabilistic. Treat them as assistants inside a governed system: constrain inputs, retrieve from approved sources, validate outputs, log decisions, and escalate exceptions. Design the process first; then apply AI to steps where ambiguity, volume, or unstructured text slow work.
Where LLMs fit in processes
Classify & route
Category, intent, priority from emails, tickets, or docs; send to the right queue with confidence thresholds.
Extract & normalize
Pull fields from contracts, invoices, or forms; validate against schemas and reference data.
Summarize & draft
Meeting/action summaries; policy drafts; customer replies with style and policy constraints.
Prefer agent-assist (recommendations) over full autonomy for high-risk actions.
Guardrail stack
Policy & identity
- Use policy: who may ask the model to do what; prohibited inputs
- RBAC/ABAC; per-user logging; data minimization
Prompt & retrieval
- Prompt templates with source citation instructions
- RAG from approved corpora; block internet unless whitelisted
- System prompts stored and versioned
Input & output filters
- PII/secret redaction; file type/size limits
- Schema validation (JSON), regex/enum checks
- Toxicity/safety filters; jailbreak detection
Tool limits
- Allowlisted APIs/tools with quotas
- Dry-run mode for high-impact actions
Logging & audit
- Prompt, context, tool calls, outputs, override/approval trails
- Retention & access aligned to policy
Kill switch
- Disable model/tool per user, per function, or globally
- Rollback instructions for downstream changes
Architecture patterns (RAG, tools, approval)
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)
- Embed approved documents; search → ground responses with citations
- Chunking, embeddings cache, freshness policy
- Block responses without sources for certain tasks
Tool/Function calling
- LLM proposes parameters; platform executes tools
- Whitelisted tools only; sandbox side effects
Approval workflows
- Thresholds by risk: auto-approve, review, or block
- Human signatures stored with rationale and evidence
Data, privacy & security
Boundaries
- No sensitive data to external models unless policy allows
- PII redaction; jurisdictional data residency; retention limits
- Separate model context from long-term storage
Identity & access
- SIGNED requests; per-user tokens; least privilege
- Prompt/context access equals user’s data access
Evaluation & monitoring
Offline evals
- Task accuracy; faithfulness/groundedness
- Red-team prompts; jailbreak/poison tests
Online monitoring
- Safety triggers, override rate, approval latency
- Hallucination flags (no source), escalation counts
Drift & regression
- Re-score on golden sets after model or data change
- Canary/ring deployments; rollback plan
Risk & compliance
Frameworks
- NIST AI Risk Management Framework (governance, map, measure, manage)
- ISO/IEC 23894 AI risk management (guidance)
- Model/system cards for transparency
Documentation
- Purpose, scope, data sources, evaluation results
- Known limits; escalation/appeal path
Human-in-the-loop design
Thresholds
- Confidence × impact grid to decide auto vs. review
- Guard high-risk actions behind approvals
Interfaces
- Show sources and diffs; allow quick edits
- Capture human feedback for re-eval/re-ranking
Latency, cost & performance
Levers
- Prompt size; context window; chunking
- Embeddings cache; result caching with TTL
- Model routing by task; streaming vs. batch
Budgeting
- Token budgets per user/team
- Rate limits; quota alerts; cost per task
90-day starter
Days 0–30: Policy & scope
- Publish AI use policy; define allowed tasks
- Choose two low-risk use cases; set metrics
Days 31–60: Build with guardrails
- RAG from approved sources; input/output filters
- Logging, evaluations, and kill switch in place
Days 61–90: Pilot & scale plan
- Run pilot; track accuracy, overrides, safety hits
- Decide on scale; add canary deploys and rollback
References
- NIST AI Risk Management Framework — nist.gov
- ISO/IEC 23894:2023 (AI risk management) — iso.org
- OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications — owasp.org
- Model/AI system cards (transparency) — google: model cards · Meta: system cards
Use LLMs where they help—and cage them with guardrails where they don’t.
If you want a guardrails checklist (policy → retrieval → filters → logging → approvals), ask for a copy.