What proof is missing when an AI agent buys something?

What it is built from

It is not a new evidence format. It is meant to be filled in from evidence that already exists, such as a dispute bundle from the A-Comm Evidence Protocol (AEP, an open specification published by A-Comm Technologies), a payment processor's records or a bank's records.

Who it is for

It is meant to be filled in by whoever prepares the evidence for a disputed purchase: the store, its payment processor, the bank that issued the card, the agent's platform, or a dispute team working for any of them. A shopper does not fill it in.

The 8 questions

• AP-1. Who sent the agent, and for whom?
• AP-2. What did the person ask for?
• AP-3. What was the agent allowed to do?
• AP-4. Did a person approve it when it went over a limit?
• AP-5. What did the agent try, in order, including retries?
• AP-6. What happened, according to someone other than the agent?
• AP-7. What did the agent say it did? (Kept, but it is not proof of what happened.)
• AP-8. Was the permission still active when the agent paid?

The answers

Each question gets 1 answer. "Present" means the proof is there and can be checked. For AP-7, "present" just means the agent's claim was recorded; it is still not proof. AP-4 can also be "not required", when the records show the purchase matched what the person asked for and stayed inside all its limits. Otherwise the answer is a why code from the list below. If more than 1 code fits, the checklist sets which to use.

Here, the "agent side" means the AI agent, the company that made it, whoever runs it, and anyone working for them. If a store runs its own shopping agent, the store is on the agent side too. An "outside party" is anyone else, such as the payment processor, the bank, the delivery company, or a store that does not run the agent.

• DISAGREES: 2 records tell different stories.
• NOT_ACTIVE: the permission had been withdrawn or had expired when the agent paid.
• UNVERIFIABLE: an outside record exists, but its signature did not check out, or the check was not run.
• SELF_REPORT_ONLY: so far the agent side alone has a record, and an outside party that usually keeps 1 could be asked.
• NO_OUTSIDE_SOURCE: whoever filled in the checklist says no outside party keeps this kind of record, so the agent side alone has it.
• NOT_CAPTURED: no usable record was found for this purchase. There may be none at all, or none made in time or tied to this purchase.

Anything that cannot be checked counts as missing, not as fine.

How it fits with what exists

Think of AEP as a sealed evidence box, and the checklist as the inspection sheet clipped to the outside: what a reviewer needs, what is in the box, and what is missing. Other records can be listed on the sheet too.

• Which agent it was: agents can identify themselves to the store, the way a visitor shows a badge. Examples are Web Bot Auth, the Visa Trusted Agent Protocol and Mastercard Agent Pay.
• What the person allowed: the person can sign a permission slip for the agent, called a mandate. Examples are Google AP2 and Mastercard Verifiable Intent. American Express has announced agent purchase protection for registered agents, tied to a purchase intent the cardholder authenticates.
• The sealed box: AEP, a draft open specification, records a purchase in a signed bundle that is sealed when the payment is approved, with delivery and refunds added after. AEP has its own terms on how its records may be used, including that records a platform made under AEP are not to be used against that platform.
• The checklist asks the 8 questions of that evidence and says which answers are missing, and why.

What the card networks say today

In the public Visa, Mastercard and American Express material we checked on 3 November 2026, we found no dispute code just for purchases made by an AI agent. In that material, those disputes go under the existing codes. The networks are adding pieces: in fraud disputes over card-absent purchases (online, mail and phone orders), Visa's rules now let a login ID from an agent payment service help match a shopper's earlier undisputed purchases (rules change of 24 October 2026), and American Express says its planned agent purchase protection is in addition to its usual dispute process. Mastercard's current chargeback guide is not public, so this covers its public material.

What this is not

• Not a verdict. A missing answer is not proof of fraud or of fault.
• Not a seal or a pass mark.
• Not a rule about who pays.
• Not a replacement for card network rules or the law.

Version and license

Version 0.1 is a draft, free to use under the Apache License 2.0, the same license AEP uses. The rules, the reference checker and the 67 test cases live in the Agent Proof Checklist repository. To comment or propose a change, open an issue there.

Names of standards and products belong to their owners. No endorsement is implied.