The documents that let a firm run the AI tools it has been given safely.
Clear Build wrote a seven-document AI governance suite for a UK professional engineering consultancy whose AI tools it had built, and issued it to the client on 19 August 2026 as a request for comment. It is reference-aligned to ISO/IEC 42001, with ISO 9001, ISO/IEC 27001 and the ICO and NCSC AI guidance in support. It stands on what it is. No time figure is claimed.
- Sector
- UK professional engineering consultancy
- Engagement
- Documentation suite, written for a client whose AI tools Clear Build built. Issued 19 August 2026
- Result
- Seven documents issued as drafts for comment. No time figure is claimed
The tools are not enough. The firm needs to be able to run them.
A firm that has had AI tools built for it needs more than the tools. It needs the documents that let it run them safely, compliantly and credibly: who may use them, how each one is run, where a person must decide, and what happens to the data.
Anchors first, then one procedure per tool.
An AI use policy and a procedure for using the firm's AI workspace were written first as anchors, so that no later document could drift by referencing a missing parent.
Beneath them sit one procedure per AI tool Clear Build built, a human-oversight standard that cuts across every tool, a data and confidentiality note, and a short Clear Build overview deck.
Each procedure carries a flow diagram grounded in the tool's own files, so a diagram can never show a step the tool does not have, and a tree of documents shows how the set fits together.
Every document is written plain but precise: a non-technical manager can follow every step, while the precision a consultant and an auditor rely on is preserved.
A fabricated control is a failure, not a fix-later item.
Every grounded document passed a clause-level quality check that treats a fabricated control as a failure.
Before the suite was scaled, that gate was proved on planted fake controls and caught both blind on the first pass. It then caught a real error in a live document, a policy overstating a tool that was still mid-build, which was fixed before issue.
The suite was tailored rather than exhaustive: every document had to earn its place by being useful to the client.
Issued as drafts, for comment.
The seven documents were issued to the client on 19 August 2026, watermarked as drafts, as a request for comment rather than adoption.
The method is client-agnostic: brand, voice, tool list and standards scope are inputs, so the same suite can be produced for the next firm without starting again.
No client quote appears on this page and consent to name the client was not sought.