Release
What changes when the source or behaviour changes?
Learn to identify which promises are affected by a changed source or behaviour, retest the important cases and make a defensible release decision.
Required: your AI Operating Charter and either your own workflow or the fictional starter case. AI/GPT is not required for the core simulation.
Check the changed-price case, define the affected and regression retests, then decide what may proceed, be restricted or stop.
A current AI Operating Charter, retest set, release owner, operating decision and next review trigger.
A completed classroom charter is decision evidence, not proof of production readiness.
What you will leave with
A current AI Operating Charter and release decision. Add this to your AI Operating Charter.
Use your own workflow or the fictional quotation case. No coding or live customer action is needed.
Start with a decision · 10 minutes
A price list changes on 1 October. The assistant still quotes RM4,000 for a new order on 2 October and guarantees delivery. Ask what may keep running.
Bite A · Identify the affected promise
Question: Which outputs are now wrong?
Input: S10 P-OCT: RM8.40; Q-108 new order for 500; existing valid quotes honoured. Open the case cards.
Try · 12 minutes: Check Q-108 against the effective source and policy. Separate new enquiries from existing agreed quotes. Decide what is held and what can continue.
Compare after you have decided
Q-108 should be RM4,200. Existing valid quotes retain their agreed terms. The delivery promise is unsupported.
Keep: Change impact and restricted scope.
Bite B · Retest before increasing dependence
Question: Which cases guard against regression?
Input: Accumulated tests and S10 change. Open the case cards.
Try · 12 minutes: Specify new-price, valid-old-quote, missing-fact, discount-refusal and approval-before-send cases. Assign the release decision to Mira within her authority.
Compare after you have decided
A source update can affect more than price arithmetic. Check the changed case and the important previous boundaries.
Keep: Retest set, release owner and review trigger.
Bite C · Make the final operating decision
Question: Proceed, add controls, restrict or stop?
Input: Completed charter and actual classroom evidence. Open the case cards.
Try · 12 minutes: Defend the decision with evidence, gaps and permitted scope. Answer the opening question and identify one action to take after class.
Compare after you have decided
Checked drafting may remain useful while automatic sending is restricted. A classroom charter is a reasoned decision, not proof of production readiness.
Keep: Final charter, evidence and next review.
Put it together · 20 minutes
A peer can explain the operating decision, evidence, gap, owner, fallback and change trigger from the charter alone. Revise the weakest item and have a partner use it. Keep the result and one limitation.
Close your question · 10 minutes
Return to What changes when the source or behaviour changes? and your own opening question. Answered, partly answered or still open? Show the evidence. Save the updated AI Operating Charter. A reasoned decision to keep a step human-led is useful work.
Common trap
Do not increase authority merely because a new version is available or a checklist is filled in.
What if I choose to stop? Record the customer fallback and restart evidence; a reasoned stop or reduced scope is a valid outcome.
Where this appears in real work
Alamak release/maintenance: use an approved version, failed check, correction and observed published result as the later sample. The class uses the fictional packet; selected project demonstrations and technical walkthroughs can add detail later.