All Locks
Responsible AI
The responsible-AI plan Foundry expects: concrete harms analysis, privacy by design, bias testing and human accountability — not a paragraph of good intentions.
9 minute read · applies to All locks
Responsibility is scored at every lock
Lock 1 scores meaningful (not gratuitous) AI use. Lock 2 dedicates ten points to responsible AI and privacy. Lock 3 evaluates what you actually shipped. A responsible-AI plan is not a compliance paragraph — it is a design artefact that names specific harms and shows specific countermeasures.
Name your harms specifically
Generic statements ("we will avoid bias") score nothing. Specific analysis does: who could be hurt if your model is wrong, in which direction, and how badly? A triage assistant that under-flags is different from one that over-flags. A scheme-eligibility tool that hallucinates a benefit sets a family up for rejection. Write the failure stories, then design against them.
- Wrong-output harms: what does a false positive and a false negative each cost, and to whom?
- Exclusion harms: who cannot use this — language, device, disability — and what happens to them?
- Data harms: what leaks if you are breached, and how bad is it?
- Misuse harms: who could weaponise this tool against its own users?
Privacy by design, practically
- Collect the minimum; prefer session-only and on-device processing where possible
- Encrypt personal data at rest; never log raw personal content
- Give users visibility and deletion rights over their own data
- For minors: guardian consent, and even stricter minimisation
- Know your third parties: every API that sees user data is part of your privacy surface
Test for bias with your real users in mind
Slice your evaluation: does accuracy hold across genders, languages, urban and rural inputs, low-end cameras? A small honestly-sliced evaluation beats a large aggregate number. Report the slices in your submission — including the ones that look bad, alongside what you changed.
Keep a human accountable
Mirror Foundry’s own design: AI recommends, humans decide. For any output that affects a person’s health, money, safety or legal standing, your product needs a human pathway — an escalation contact, an expert review step, a "get qualified help" route that is prominent, not buried. Demonstrating this pathway working is one of the strongest things a Lock 3 demo can show.
Before you submit — the checklist
- Specific harms analysis with failure stories
- Data-minimisation and consent design documented
- Bias evaluation sliced by your real user dimensions
- Uncertainty display and refusal behaviour designed
- Human escalation path built and demonstrated
- Clear in-product statement of what the tool is not
Related guides
Problem Definition
How to find, narrow and evidence a problem worth three months of your team’s life — the single highest-leverag...
Lock 2 · DesignAI Architecture
Choosing models, designing pipelines and drawing the architecture diagram evaluators actually want to see — ap...
Lock 2 · DesignData Planning
Finding data you can actually use, handling it lawfully, and being honest about its gaps — the part of the blu...
Put this guide to work.
The rubric this guide addresses is waiting inside your team’s build journey.
Register Your Team