S6 — Acceptance Table

This segment is the top-level acceptance matrix for the counsel brief. It records the agreed scenario coverage, risk status, and follow-ups, and links to the FM, Penumbral, and Welfare materials where appropriate.

What this page does

Provides a single pane of glass for accepted commitments and scenarios.
Captures GREEN / AMBER status and follow-up actions.
Links into runbook/checklist views for implementation.

Acceptance matrix (portfolio demo)

In the working files, this section is a full table. For this portfolio demo, you can either embed the live table here or link to the authoritative S6 acceptance matrix page used in active matters.

4. Post-matter review & refresh loop

Once a matter has been recorded in the S6 matrix and, where relevant, in the Foreseeable Misuse and Penumbral acceptance tables, we recommend a short post-matter review. The goal is to capture learning and keep Anthropic’s commitments and controls aligned with how the system is actually used.

Re-check posture. Confirm that the GREEN / AMBER posture remains appropriate in light of any recent deployments, regulator guidance, or incident learnings.
Capture “what we’d do differently.” Note surprises, friction points, and governance gaps that surfaced during the matter so they can inform future work.
Update artifacts where needed. Decide whether to refresh the FM or Penumbral tables, the S6 matrix, internal playbooks, or customer-facing guidance.
Feed RPE watchpoints. If the matter revealed a pattern of concern, add or adjust RPE watchpoints so similar scenarios are flagged earlier next time.

In a portfolio demo, this review step is intentionally light-weight, but it shows how counsel can close the loop between individual matters and Anthropic’s broader governance and product obligations.

Reading a row in the acceptance matrix

The acceptance tables are most useful when everyone shares a common understanding of what a single row actually represents. At a minimum, each row should answer: what scenario we are looking at, what posture we landed on, and what conditions or follow-ups are attached.

Scenario and core question. This describes the use case in plain language and names the key legal or governance question (for example, “How much reliance on model outputs is acceptable for junior professionals?”).
Anthropic commitments and customer responsibilities. These columns split the world into things Anthropic is committing to do or maintain and things the customer or integrator must take responsibility for on their side.
Role of terms, disclaimers, and sources. Here we note which public documents or contract terms the posture leans on, and whether any new language is recommended for this class of deployment.
Risk status and follow-ups. Finally, the posture column records whether we treat this as GREEN, AMBER, or similar, and the follow-up column captures any monitoring, revisitation, or design work that should happen over time.

S6 does not attempt to resolve every detail on its own. Instead, it gives counsel and product teams a compact way to see how similar matters have been treated and where to look next if a posture needs to be revisited.