How do I tell whether an approval process is worth simulating?

Use this list to decide whether a candidate approval process carries enough authority logic to justify building it into an environment.

- The right approver changes with the amount, so the agent must compare a figure with a limit, not just read a role. - Risk class, product or category can override the amount, creating at least two independent routing rules. - Authority can be delegated for a date range, so the valid approver differs between episodes with the same request. - Cumulative limits apply, meaning earlier approvals in a period reduce what a person can still sign. - The requester or editor is barred from approving their own item, forcing a reroute. - Escalation, return for information and rejection are all legitimate outcomes with different state changes. - Policy text and the system of record can disagree, so the agent must notice and flag the conflict. - Errors are recoverable only through a defined reversal step, giving evaluators a clear consequence to score.

A process with four or more of these properties usually gives an agent real decisions to make. A process with only one, such as a flat threshold, is better served by a simpler task and may not need a full environment.

MirrorFirm could generate material for either case, and a pilot is a sensible place to test how much authority complexity your agents actually need.