If AI affected you, ask for the receipt.
If AI changed a record, blocked a workflow, accessed a file, triggered a decision, or caused harm, the first question is not whether the AI seemed reasonable. The first question is: where is the record?
The receipt makes the action inspectable.
A Governed Action Receipt is a signed record of one governed action. It can show what the AI tried to do, which rule applied, what happened, who or what allowed it, when it happened, and whether the record still verifies.
The affected person may not have been in the approval loop. That is exactly why the receipt matters.
Use plain questions.
Was a receipt created?
Ask for the receipt for the action that affected you, and the public key needed to verify it.
Who authorized it?
Ask whether the outcome came from a rule, a named person, the gate, or timeout.
Was the action routed?
Ask whether the action passed through ZLAR, and whether a coverage report exists.
Can you provide the receipt for the AI action that affected me?
Can you provide the public key needed to verify it?
What rule version and rule applied?
Was the action authorized by a person, allowed by rule, blocked, or timed out?
Was this action inside the governed doorway, and is there a coverage report?VALID means intact. It does not mean correct.
A valid receipt means the record has not been changed since it was signed by the relevant key. A log records what happened. A ZLAR receipt records what counted as authorized effect. It does not prove the decision was good, fair, lawful, complete, or wise.
If the receipt says the action was denied, but the action still happened, the boundary may have been bypassed or the receipt may not describe the action that affected you.
Disclosure
This page is general information about ZLAR's receipt concept, not legal advice. Rights, remedies, and access obligations depend on the organization and jurisdiction involved.