Skip to Content
Examples03 — Compliance check stamped

Example 03: Cause-and-effect matrix gap analysis for a stamped deliverable

Scenario: a process safety engineer at an engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) firm is reviewing a draft cause-and-effect (C&E) matrix for the safety instrumented system (SIS) of a hydroprocessing unit before applying their Professional Engineer seal.

Tools exercised: compliance_check, resolve_term.

Standard (fictional): PASC-184.02-2025, Cause-and-Effect Matrix Conformance for Safety Instrumented Systems.

Engineering intent: gap-analysis (1).

Deliverable type: stamped-deliverable (3).

Requester authority: individual-licensee (0). The PE seal attaches liability to the named engineer.

CLASP version: 0.1.

Language: canonical en; AI System declares preferred_languages: ["en"]. Stamped deliverables require canonical-language attestation; see envelope obligations in the spec.

Engineering context

The C&E matrix was authored partly by hand and partly by an upstream tool. Before applying their PE seal, the engineer wants an independent gap analysis against the specific conformance clauses of the standard (clauses 7.2, 7.3, and Annex B). The engineer’s workstation runs a CLASP-aware AI agent that already holds a license to the standard.

The AI agent submits the draft C&E matrix as a CSV file to compliance_check and receives a structured list of findings, each anchored to one or more clauses. The agent then issues a resolve_term for the defined term “safe state” because one finding hinges on the engineer’s interpretation of that term matching the standard’s vocabulary clause.

Step 1: CoMP handshake request

{
  "aisystem": {
    "name": "epc-safety-review.example",
    "ua": "SafetyReviewAI/3.2",
    "id": "TL-REG-445566",
    "aisysuse": {
      "lid": "PASC-LIC-INDIV-PE-2026-71140",
      "aiauth": 2,
      "uri": ["https://retrieval.pasc.example/mcp"],
      "scope": 5,
      "function": [1],
      "subfn": [4],
      "resdis": 1,
      "ext": {
        "clasp_version": "0.1",
        "engineering_intent": [1],
        "target_designation": ["PASC-184.02"],
        "target_edition": "2025",
        "target_clauses": ["7.2", "7.3", "Annex B"],
        "preferred_languages": ["en"],
        "requester_sectors": [3, 2],
        "deliverable_type": 3,
        "requester_authority": 0
      }
    }
  }
}

What this declares

  • function = [1] (ai-all): the agent performs analysis that goes beyond pure retrieval; CoMP’s ai-all is the broadest commercial classification.
  • subfn = [4] (agent-actions): the agent is taking an action on behalf of the engineer (running a check), not just consuming content.
  • engineering_intent = [1] (gap-analysis): the engineering workflow is comparing an artifact against a standard.
  • target_clauses = ["7.2", "7.3", "Annex B"]: the session is narrowly scoped to the conformance clauses and the relevant annex. Annex B is a top-level annex reference; clause-level addressing inside the annex would use Annex B.1, Annex B.2, etc.
  • deliverable_type = 3 (stamped-deliverable): the engineer will apply a PE seal. The Content Owner is expected to require exact_text_mode = 1.
  • requester_authority = 0 (individual-licensee): the license is held by the PE personally; liability for the stamped deliverable attaches to that individual.
  • requester_sectors = [3, 2] (oil-and-gas, chemical): the PE’s EPC firm operates in both sectors and the hydroprocessing project sits at their intersection. The Content Owner may use this to apply sector-conditional rules in compliance_check (clauses that apply differently to refinery service versus chemical-process service).

Step 2: CoMP handshake response

{
  "package": {
    "id": "PKG-PASC-184-02-2025-S77",
    "title": "PASC-184.02-2025, Cause-and-Effect Matrix Conformance for SIS",
    "seller": "pasc.example",
    "licenseurl": "https://pasc.example/licensing/clasp-terms-pe",
    "reporturl": "https://pasc.example/reporting/clasp-usage",
    "citation": 1,
    "scope": {
      "scope": 5,
      "ause": 0,
      "pricetype": 1,
      "licensedur": 365,
      "max": 1,
      "ctype": [0],
      "text": [
        {
          "title": "PASC-184.02-2025, Cause-and-Effect Matrix Conformance for SIS",
          "language": [22],
          "pubdate": "2025-06-04T00:00:00Z",
          "author": ["Process Automation Standards Council"],
          "sourcetype": 0
        }
      ],
      "ext": {
        "clasp_version": "0.1",
        "publisher": "pasc.example",
        "designation": "PASC-184.02",
        "edition": "2025",
        "pubdate": "2025-06-04",
        "canonical_language": "en",
        "available_languages": ["en"],
        "supersedes": ["PASC-184.02-2018"],
        "industry_sectors": [2, 3, 4],
        "clause_scheme": "https://pasc.example/schemas/clause-scheme/184-02-2025.json",
        "defined_terms_uri": "https://pasc.example/standards/184-02/2025/defined-terms",
        "normative_refs": [
          {
            "designation": "PASC-184.01",
            "edition": "2022",
            "publisher": "pasc.example",
            "clauses": ["5.3", "6.1"]
          }
        ]
      }
    },
    "retrieval": {
      "auth": 2,
      "endpoint": "https://retrieval.pasc.example/mcp",
      "type": [3],
      "ext": {
        "clasp_version": "0.1",
        "tools": [0, 1, 2, 4, 5],
        "exact_text_mode": 1,
        "citation_envelope": "https://clasp.example/schemas/citation-envelope-0.1.json",
        "max_artifact_bytes": 4194304
      }
    }
  }
}

What this declares

  • industry_sectors = [2, 3, 4] (chemical, oil-and-gas, power-generation): the standard applies across multiple process-industry sectors. The handshake’s requester_sectors = [3, 2] (oil-and-gas, chemical) declares which sectors the requester operates in; the intersection ({2, 3}) is the operative scope for sector-conditional rules. Power-generation clauses in this standard are not relevant to this session. The ISIC Rev 4 cross-reference for [2, 3] is C20 and B06, available to downstream integrators via the List: Industry Sector table.
  • retrieval.ext.tools = [0, 1, 2, 4, 5]: this endpoint exposes get_clause, search, resolve_term, resolve_reference, and compliance_check. It does not expose list_changes for this license tier.
  • retrieval.ext.exact_text_mode = 1 is required by the stamped-deliverable declaration. The Content Owner has authorized the session under this constraint.
  • retrieval.ext.max_artifact_bytes = 4194304 (4 MiB): the artifact submitted to compliance_check MUST NOT exceed this size.
  • scope.max = 1: per CoMP, there is an upper limit on how much can be consumed in this session; details are in the license terms.

Step 3: MCP tool call — compliance_check

The AI agent submits the draft C&E matrix as a CSV payload (here abbreviated to a single representative row for readability) against the declared clause set.

Tool call (artifact abbreviated):

{
  "tool": "compliance_check",
  "arguments": {
    "artifact": {
      "content_type": "text/csv",
      "encoding": "utf-8",
      "bytes": "Q2F1c2VfSUQsQ2F1c2VfRGVzY3JpcHRpb24sRWZmZWN0X0lELEVmZmVjdF9EZXNjcmlwdGlvbixUaW1lX3RvX1NhZmVfU3RhdGUKQy0wMDEsRmVlZF9ndWFyZF9oaWdoX3ByZXNzdXJlX3RyaXAsRS0wMTAsSXNvbGF0ZV9mZWVkX3ZhbHZlX1hWLTEwMSwxMHMKQy0wMDIsUmVhY3Rvcl9oaWdoX3RlbXBlcmF0dXJlX3RyaXAsRS0wMjEsRmFpbF9zYWZlX29wZW5fcXVlbmNoX3ZhbHZlX1hWLTIyMyw1cw=="
    },
    "clauses": ["7.2", "7.3", "Annex B.1", "Annex B.2"]
  }
}

(The bytes field is base64-encoded; decoded it begins with a CSV header Cause_ID,Cause_Description,Effect_ID,Effect_Description,Time_to_Safe_State and contains the relevant rows.)

Response:

{
  "findings": [
    {
      "finding_id": "F-001",
      "severity": 0,
      "referenced_clauses": ["7.2"],
      "artifact_location": "row 2, columns Cause_ID through Effect_Description",
      "explanation": "Row 2 declares a single cause (C-001) mapping to a single effect (E-010) with both identifiers and descriptions populated. This satisfies clause 7.2 requirements for unambiguous cause-to-effect identification."
    },
    {
      "finding_id": "F-002",
      "severity": 2,
      "referenced_clauses": ["7.3", "Annex B.1"],
      "artifact_location": "row 3, column Time_to_Safe_State",
      "explanation": "Row 3 declares Time_to_Safe_State as 5 seconds for effect E-021 (fail-safe open quench valve XV-223). Clause 7.3 requires that the time-to-safe-state value be supported by either a calculation reference or a test reference; the matrix row contains no such reference and the accompanying documentation submitted does not include one. Annex B.1 specifies the documentation expected to support sub-10-second declarations specifically. This is a gap relative to both the body clause and the annex."
    },
    {
      "finding_id": "F-003",
      "severity": 1,
      "referenced_clauses": ["Annex B.2"],
      "artifact_location": "row 3, column Effect_Description",
      "explanation": "Effect E-021 is described as 'fail-safe open quench valve XV-223'. Annex B.2 advises that fail-safe valve effects be described in terms of the resulting process state (e.g., 'quench flow established') rather than the valve action ('valve opened'), so that the matrix is auditable against the safe-state definition independent of valve implementation. This is advisory, not a gap."
    }
  ],
  "envelope": {
    "envelope_version": "0.1",
    "tool": "compliance_check",
    "publisher": "pasc.example",
    "designation": "PASC-184.02",
    "primary_edition": "2025",
    "comparison_edition": null,
    "language": "en",
    "retrieval_timestamp": "2026-05-15T16:42:55Z",
    "endpoint_uri": "https://retrieval.pasc.example/mcp",
    "license_id_fingerprint": "sha256:3a2b1c0d9e8f7a6b5c4d3e2f1a0b9c8d7e6f5a4b3c2d1e0f9a8b7c6d5e4f3a2b",
    "deliverable_type": 3,
    "requester_authority": 0,
    "citations": [
      {
        "clause": "7.2",
        "mode": 4,
        "content_hash": "sha256:5a6b7c8d9e0f1a2b3c4d5e6f7a8b9c0d1e2f3a4b5c6d7e8f9a0b1c2d3e4f5a6b",
        "content_length": 412,
        "snippet": null,
        "diff": null,
        "pointer": null
      },
      {
        "clause": "7.3",
        "mode": 4,
        "content_hash": "sha256:6b7c8d9e0f1a2b3c4d5e6f7a8b9c0d1e2f3a4b5c6d7e8f9a0b1c2d3e4f5a6b7c",
        "content_length": 736,
        "snippet": null,
        "diff": null,
        "pointer": null
      },
      {
        "clause": "Annex B.1",
        "mode": 4,
        "content_hash": "sha256:7c8d9e0f1a2b3c4d5e6f7a8b9c0d1e2f3a4b5c6d7e8f9a0b1c2d3e4f5a6b7c8d",
        "content_length": 736,
        "snippet": null,
        "diff": null,
        "pointer": null
      },
      {
        "clause": "Annex B.2",
        "mode": 4,
        "content_hash": "sha256:8d9e0f1a2b3c4d5e6f7a8b9c0d1e2f3a4b5c6d7e8f9a0b1c2d3e4f5a6b7c8d9e",
        "content_length": 324,
        "snippet": null,
        "diff": null,
        "pointer": null
      }
    ]
  }
}

What this demonstrates

  • One envelope per response, with one citation per unique referenced clause. Finding F-002 references two clauses (7.3 and Annex B.1); both appear in the citations array exactly once each (de-duplicated across findings).
  • Every citation has mode = 4 (structured-analysis). The content_hash for each citation is computed over the canonical JSON serialization of the finding object(s) referencing that clause, sorted by finding_id. So the hash for clause 7.3 is over F-002; the hash for clause Annex B.1 is over F-002 as well (same finding); they happen to be equal in content_length because both reference the same finding.
  • The artifact content is NOT in the envelope. The Content Owner does not retain the artifact (per the protocol’s compliance_check retention rule) and the citation envelope is over the findings (the Content Owner’s output), not the artifact (the AI System’s input).
  • An AI System emitting a gap-analysis report to the engineer must attach this envelope. The report can paraphrase findings, but if it quotes any clause text from PASC-184.02, it must do so through a separate get_clause envelope; mode = 4 is not sufficient authority for verbatim clause text.
  • artifact_location uses CSV row/column addressing because the artifact’s content type is text/csv. For a different content type the format would differ (PDF page/paragraph, code file line, etc).

Step 4: MCP tool call — resolve_term

The engineer flags F-003 for review and the agent retrieves the standard’s definition of “safe state” so the engineer can confirm the matrix’s terminology is consistent.

Tool call:

{
  "tool": "resolve_term",
  "arguments": {
    "term": "safe state"
  }
}

Response:

{
  "definitions": [
    {
      "clause": "3.1.17",
      "term": "safe state",
      "definition": "state of the equipment under control (EUC) in which an identified hazard cannot be realized, or in which the consequences of the realized hazard remain within tolerable limits as specified in the safety requirements specification. NOTE 1: A safe state may require continued operation of one or more safety functions. NOTE 2: For a continuous process, the safe state is normally a continued operating state distinct from full shutdown. NOTE 3: For a batch process, the safe state may be defined per-phase.",
      "mode": "exact-text"
    }
  ],
  "envelope": {
    "envelope_version": "0.1",
    "tool": "resolve_term",
    "publisher": "pasc.example",
    "designation": "PASC-184.02",
    "primary_edition": "2025",
    "comparison_edition": null,
    "language": "en",
    "retrieval_timestamp": "2026-05-15T16:43:14Z",
    "endpoint_uri": "https://retrieval.pasc.example/mcp",
    "license_id_fingerprint": "sha256:3a2b1c0d9e8f7a6b5c4d3e2f1a0b9c8d7e6f5a4b3c2d1e0f9a8b7c6d5e4f3a2b",
    "deliverable_type": 3,
    "requester_authority": 0,
    "citations": [
      {
        "clause": "3.1.17",
        "mode": 0,
        "content_hash": "sha256:9e0f1a2b3c4d5e6f7a8b9c0d1e2f3a4b5c6d7e8f9a0b1c2d3e4f5a6b7c8d9e0f",
        "content_length": 558,
        "snippet": null,
        "diff": null,
        "pointer": null
      }
    ]
  }
}

What this demonstrates

  • clause 3.1.17 is OUTSIDE the session’s declared target_clauses (7.2, 7.3, Annex B). The Content Owner authorized resolve_term access to the standard’s vocabulary clauses (3.x in this standard) even though they were not enumerated in target_clauses, because the vocabulary is supporting infrastructure for the declared clauses. Whether this is universally OK or whether a Content Owner can decline such resolutions is something the spec leaves to the Content Owner’s policy; the CLASP-0.1 spec does not normatively require either behavior.
  • mode = 0 (exact-text): the definition is verbatim. The engineer can quote it in the stamped deliverable’s defined-terms section accompanied by this envelope.

What this example demonstrates that the others do not

  • compliance_check: the most architecturally novel CLASP tool, with an artifact input and a structured findings output.
  • mode = 4 (structured-analysis) citations and how they hash over findings rather than over clause text.
  • resolve_term and how it can resolve clauses outside the declared target_clauses set.
  • stamped-deliverable deliverable type with requester_authority = individual-licensee (the PE-specific liability case).
  • CoMP subfn = [4] (agent-actions): the AI is performing an action, not just retrieving.
  • target_clauses containing both numbered clauses and an annex-level reference (Annex B).
  • requester_sectors populated, demonstrating the field that lets AI Systems declare the requester’s sector on the handshake.
  • A CoMP max = 1 package, indicating that license terms cap the volume of use.

Notes on the protocol surface

  • The annex addressing used here is Annex B at the session level (the broadest scope) and Annex B.1, Annex B.2 at the tool-call level (specific sub-clauses). The clause_scheme URI is the authority for this syntax.
  • The artifact is base64-encoded inside the MCP tool call. Norma will specify whether large artifacts should use a side-channel upload instead. For 4 MiB this inline encoding is acceptable.
  • The Content Owner’s policy on artifact retention is communicated through the license terms, not through the protocol. The protocol says the Content Owner MUST NOT retain the artifact beyond the tool call’s duration unless the license explicitly permits.
  • The requester_authority = 0 declaration on a stamped-deliverable is the case where the citation envelope’s downstream attribution is to a named individual. The license_id_fingerprint is a one-way hash of the license ID, so a downstream reviewer (a regulator, a client) can verify that the envelope’s fingerprint matches the engineer’s license without the engineer’s license ID being exposed in the deliverable.
02 — Cross edition regulatorybpec-catalog