claude-platform-playbook

Claude Governance Overlay

As of 2026-05. Pin to current model surface (Opus 4.7 / Sonnet 4.6 / Haiku 4.5) — refresh monthly. See ../docs/feature-inventory.md for canonical feature + status list.

This is a risk + compliance overlay — not a generic AI governance framework. It tells you what changes when your AI runs on Claude specifically, and where the standard NIST / EU AI Act controls map onto Claude’s surface.

Verification posture. No-train terms, ZDR scope, BAA per-feature eligibility, data residency options, retention defaults, and pricing all drift. Anything below cited as a fact must be re-verified at signing time and quarterly thereafter. Treat this as a checklist of questions to confirm, not a guarantee of state. Primary sources cited inline; verify against current versions at docs.claude.com, privacy.claude.com, and the Trust Portal.

🛑 Read first: anti-use-cases.md. This overlay tells you how to govern a Claude deployment that should exist. The anti-use list tells you which deployments shouldn’t exist in the first place — sole-decider on regulated decisions, prompt-injection-exposed agents, missing BAA / DPA paths. Run that filter before designing controls.


1. Data flow taxonomy — what leaves your network

Workload What leaves What stays Destination
Direct API call Prompt + tool definitions + tool results + uploaded Files Your VPC, DBs, source systems api.anthropic.com
Bedrock-routed call Same prompt content Same AWS region you specify
Vertex-routed call Same prompt content Same GCP region you specify
Computer use 2.0 loop Screenshots + action descriptions The host machine binaries Anthropic API
Agent SDK / MCP Tool input + tool output Tool internals (DB credentials, full record set unless retrieved) Anthropic API
Files API upload The uploaded file content The original file in your storage (only a copy moves) Anthropic Files store
Memory tool reads/writes Memory blob content Other process state Anthropic memory store

Implication for design: the prompt is the trust boundary. Anything in the prompt is on Anthropic’s infra for the duration of the request (and longer if you use Files API or memory tool). Architect tool layers so they retrieve only what the model needs to see.


2. No-train guarantee

Default for commercial API + Console workloads: Anthropic does not train on customer prompts or outputs. Source: Anthropic privacy policy.

What to verify before relying on this:

  1. Sign with the policy version current at signing time. Record the version + URL + date.
  2. Confirm that all entry points your traffic uses inherit the same policy. Bedrock and Vertex inherit through their respective agreements.
  3. Re-verify quarterly. Terms can be amended.
  4. Consumer-tier products (Free, Pro, Max) are a separate policy surface with different defaults — do not extend commercial no-train assumptions to consumer plans, including when consumer accounts use Claude Code.

Audit evidence to retain:

Note on no-train vs. no-store: The default no-train guarantee does not mean Anthropic doesn’t store your data. Standard retention is 30 days at rest (see §11). To eliminate at-rest storage entirely, see §3 (Zero Data Retention).


3. Zero Data Retention (ZDR)

ZDR is a separate enterprise agreement distinct from no-train. Source: Anthropic ZDR docs (verify current version).

What ZDR changes: customer prompts and responses are not stored at rest after the API response is returned, except where required to comply with law or combat misuse.

What ZDR does NOT remove: User Safety classifier results — Anthropic still retains these to enforce the Usage Policy, even under a ZDR agreement.

Eligibility and scope:

Mis-decision watch:

Audit evidence to retain: signed ZDR agreement + amendment date; per-feature eligibility table version captured at signing; list of API endpoints + Claude Code workspaces in scope.


4. HIPAA / BAA paths

Two paths to HIPAA-ready use:

  1. HIPAA-ready API access (without ZDR) — Anthropic now supports HIPAA-ready API integrations without a ZDR prerequisite. The Claude API enforces feature eligibility automatically: a HIPAA-enabled organization that sends a request with a non-eligible feature receives a 400 error explicitly naming the disallowed feature. Source: API and data retention.
  2. HIPAA-ready services + signed BAA — for production PHI workloads. Anthropic provides a BAA covering HIPAA-ready services across the first-party API and Enterprise plans, after review of compliance items and use case. Source: BAA article.

What the BAA covers (first-party API features marked eligible at the time of signing — verify the Implementation Guide at signing):

API surface BAA-covered
Messages API, Token Counting, Models API, Org Management API Covered
Web search tool Covered
Memory tool Covered
Prompt caching, Structured outputs Covered
Bash tool Covered
Web fetch tool Not covered
Advisor tool Not covered
Code execution tool Not covered (and network access excluded even where the surrounding feature is covered)

What the BAA does NOT cover (product surface):

PHI handling rules carried over from Anthropic’s HIPAA configuration:

Common gaps to confirm before going live with PHI:


5. Data residency

Two independent controls determine where data is processed and stored. Source: Data residency docs.

Control Scope Set via Values
inference_geo Per-request — controls where model inference runs API parameter on POST /v1/messages (or workspace default) "global" (default — any geo) · "us" (US-only)
Workspace geo Workspace-level — controls at-rest storage and endpoint processing (image transcoding, code execution, etc.) Console workspace setting Per Anthropic Console workspace configuration

Key constraints:

Mis-decision watch:


6. Compliance certifications

Anthropic’s current certification posture (as of 2026-05; verify at Trust Portal):

Certification Status Notes
HIPAA-ready configuration (BAA available) Held See §4. Per-feature scope.
ISO 27001:2022 Held Information Security Management.
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Held AI Management Systems — AI-specific certification, distinct from generic InfoSec. Important for procurement teams that need an AI-governance attestation alongside SOC 2.
SOC 2 Type I & Type II Held Annual refresh. Request current report from Trust Portal before audit.

Audit evidence to retain: Trust Portal report PDFs at the version current at procurement; refresh annually; map each cert to which of your internal controls it underwrites (don’t double-document what the cert already covers).


7. EU AI Act mapping

EU AI Act sorts AI systems into 4 risk classes. Claude (the model) is a general-purpose AI (GPAI). Your application is what gets classified — Anthropic carries GPAI-provider obligations, you carry deployer / provider obligations for the application.

Risk class Examples Your obligations What Claude features help
Prohibited Social scoring, real-time biometric ID in public n/a — don’t build n/a
High-risk Hiring, credit, education access, critical infra, law enforcement Risk mgmt system, data governance, technical docs, transparency, human oversight, accuracy/robustness, post-market monitoring Citations, audit logging, eval suite, human-in-the-loop checkpoints, model version pinning
Limited-risk Chatbots, deepfakes, emotion-recognition Transparency: tell users they’re interacting with AI Standard system prompt disclosure
Minimal-risk Most internal copilots, code assist, batch enrichment Voluntary codes of conduct n/a

Your responsibility split:


8. NIST AI RMF mapping (Govern / Map / Measure / Manage)

NIST function Claude artifact in this repo Your local responsibility
Govern adoption-playbook.md Week 0 — sponsor, policies, RACI, risk register Maintain the register. Quarterly review.
Map feature-decision-matrix.html, reference-architectures.html Document context, intended use, users, data flow per use case.
Measure Eval suite (eval-starter-pack.md), audit trail (§9), cost dashboards (§15) Pre-deploy eval, ongoing accuracy + cost monitoring, red team
Manage Kill switch, model rollback runbook, incident process Test the rollback. Run incident drills.

9. Audit trail — what to log

Per request, capture:

Retention default: 90 days hot, 1–7 years cold based on workload class. Healthcare, finance, regulated public sector trend toward 7+ years.

PII handling: redact in storage if not required for audit purpose. Log the redaction event, not the redacted content.

Where this matters: EU AI Act high-risk systems must produce an automatic event log; NIST AI RMF Manage requires monitoring; SOC 2 audit requires consistency between logged behavior and stated policy.

For Claude Code (CLI) workloads: the audit-log-append and pii-scrub-prompt hooks in hooks-starter-pack.md are how this control lands at the engineer’s machine. Local-file mode is pilot-only — production audit needs append-only storage (S3 with object-lock, write-only logging endpoint) so engineers can’t edit their own audit trail.


10. Prompt + Skill versioning + rollback

Prompts and Skills are configuration of the AI system. Treat with the same rigor as a database migration.

Practice Default Why
Source-controlled Mandatory Without git history, you cannot prove what was deployed when.
Tagged with eval pass rate Mandatory Lets you reject regressions before they ship.
Versioned identifier in API request Recommended Captured in audit log → answers “what prompt produced this output?”
Last-known-good rollback path Mandatory Rollback from a regression must take minutes, not hours.
Change review required Mandatory Same gate as a schema change.
Eval-gated CI Mandatory No prompt change merges without eval pass.

Model version handling: Pin to a specific model version (e.g., claude-sonnet-4-6) in production. When Anthropic releases a new revision, the model bump is its own change with its own eval gate. Never use floating “latest” aliases in production.


11. Retention + deletion

Anthropic-side retention defaults (commercial API, no ZDR). Source: How long does Anthropic store organization data — last updated by Anthropic 2026-03-16; verify current.

Class of data Default retention Notes
Inputs and outputs (standard) 30 days at rest, then auto-deleted Backend deletion. Resets on new request.
Inputs and outputs (AUP-flagged) Up to 2 years Triggered by Trust & Safety classifier hit.
Trust & Safety classifier scores Up to 7 years Retained even under ZDR (see §3).
Feedback data (thumbs up/down, bug reports) 5 years Tied to the feedback submission.
Files API content Until user deletes Lives longer than 30 days because retention is user-controlled.
Memory tool blobs Per Anthropic memory tool docs Client-side memory storage; you control retention via memory operations.
Console / Workbench saved chats Until user deletes (within 30 days of deletion request) Not BAA-covered.

Override paths: Zero Data Retention agreement (§3) eliminates the 30-day storage for eligible API surfaces. AUP / legal compliance overrides ZDR for misuse classifier data. Custom retention controls are available on Enterprise plans — see Anthropic’s custom retention article.

Where Claude-touched data lives — your-side inventory:

Surface Retained where Default retention Deletion path
API requests (no ZDR) Anthropic logs 30 days, then auto-delete Auto. ZDR removes the 30-day window.
API requests (with ZDR) Not stored at rest n/a (T&S classifier scores retained — see above) n/a
Files API Anthropic Files store Until user deletes Files API delete call
Memory tool blobs Per memory tool config Until user deletes Memory tool delete operation
Batch jobs Anthropic batch store Per current policy — verify Per policy + key rotation
Your audit logs Your storage Per your retention policy Your deletion process

GDPR right to erasure: for EU subjects, the deletion path must reach all surfaces above + your audit logs (with documented exceptions for legal-hold + AUP-flagged data + the 7-year T&S classifier scores). Run a “delete drill” quarterly — pick a synthetic user ID, prove it’s gone everywhere it can be removed; document where it can’t.


12. Vendor concentration risk + multi-model abstraction

The “what if Anthropic disappears?” question. Real answer:

Mitigation tier Effort When justified
Stable internal SDK shape Low — write once Always
Procurement diversity (Bedrock or Vertex available alongside direct) Medium Regulated industries, hyperscaler commits
Periodic shadow eval with alternate model Medium-high High-stakes workloads, board-level concentration concern
Hot multi-model failover Very high — accuracy + cost ladder differs per model Rarely justified — usually theater

Anti-pattern: building a “model-agnostic” wrapper that strips features (no caching, no tool use, no thinking) so it works across vendors. Net effect: you’re paying full price for naive use. See cost-calculator.html for the cost of going naive.


13. IP, training data, and output ownership

Training data on Claude itself: Anthropic’s training data composition is publicly disclosed at a high level — review their model card / GPAI documentation when scoping IP-sensitive workloads.

Outputs: Per current Anthropic terms (verify version), customer owns outputs. But:

Your input data: stays yours. No-train (§2) and ZDR (§3) are the operative protections; storage retention is governed by §11.

Licensed content as input: if you upload third-party copyrighted content via Files API or in prompts, your existing license must cover the copy that goes to Anthropic for processing. Review per workload.


14. Prompt injection + content safety

Claude has built-in safety and refusal behavior, but prompt injection is your problem to solve at the application layer. Patterns:

Pattern Purpose
Separate trusted vs untrusted content in the prompt structure Clear boundary the model can defend
Treat tool results as untrusted An MCP-returned blob could carry an injection — see mcp-starter-pack.md for read-only-by-design server templates with redaction at the server layer
Sandboxed tool execution If the agent can run code, sandbox the runtime
Output validation Schema-check structured outputs; reject malformed
Content filtering on outputs Reject PII / unsafe content before exposure
Red team eval set Adversarial inputs in CI

Computer use 2.0 specific: the model sees and acts on a live UI — a malicious page can attempt injection via on-screen text. Run computer use only against trusted targets, or in an isolated environment with no access to sensitive credentials.


15. Cost as a governance constraint

Most readers come at cost via cost-calculator.html — model the spend, get a number, move on. That treats cost as a curiosity rather than a constraint. In production, cost behaves like any other governance gate: it has a threshold, a kill-switch, and an early-warning signal. If those three aren’t defined before pilot launch, “cost surprise” stays on the risk register as a named adoption playbook failure mode (see adoption-playbook.md).

This section names the gates. Run cost-calculator.html to find your numbers; record the four thresholds below in your Week 0 pilot charter.

15.1 Four numeric gates to define before launch

Gate What it caps How to set What triggers when breached
$/task ceiling Per-request cost at production token mix + cache hit rate. Take the cost-calculator output for your steady-state assumptions. Set ceiling at 1.5× — leaves headroom for prompt growth, fails loud if real volume diverges from model. Hard-stop in the application; alert the use-case owner.
$/day cap Total daily spend across the workload. (Expected daily volume × $/task ceiling). Round up to a number you can defend in a Slack message at 2am. Auto-throttle at 80% of cap; auto-disable at 100%. Wire log-cost hook (see hooks-starter-pack.md) to billing alerts.
Cache hit-rate floor Minimum sustained cache hit rate across the workload. Production cache reuse should be ≥ 60% on stable workloads (RAG, agentic, embedded copilot). If hit rate drops below floor, prompts have probably drifted. Alert; bisect last week’s prompt changes; if a Skill or system prompt rotated, that’s the cause.
Batch eligibility floor % of eligible workload running through Batch API instead of real-time. Any non-interactive task should target ≥ 80% batch eligibility. If the workload could run async but is using real-time, you’re paying 2× without justification. Quarterly review; re-platform stale real-time loops to batch.

These gates are not soft. The point of a governance constraint is that breaching it is an event — logged, alerted, owned — not a budget overrun discovered three months later in a finance review.

15.2 Why cost is a governance question, not a finance question

Three reasons it lives here, not in the calculator alone:

  1. Bound to compliance posture. Cost spikes correlate with prompt-injection attempts (a malicious input can inflate output tokens 100×), runaway agent loops (agentic patterns can recurse on tool errors), and cache invalidation incidents. Treating cost as a security signal — not just a budget line — catches these earlier.
  2. Bound to vendor concentration. A 10× cost spike on a single procurement path (direct API) without an alternative path (Bedrock / Vertex / open-source fallback) is a vendor-concentration and a budget incident. See §12 Vendor concentration risk.
  3. Bound to audit trail. A breach of the $/day cap is an audit event. Log: which use case, which model, which prompt, what triggered the throttle. Wire to the same audit pipeline as no-train + BAA evidence (see §9 Audit trail).

15.3 Anti-pattern — “we’ll watch the bill monthly”

Monthly billing review is not a governance gate. Cloud cost discipline learned this 10 years ago: by the time the invoice arrives, the bad week has already happened, the runaway loop has already burned the budget, and the post-mortem points at a hook that should have existed. Same lesson, same fix:

If your pilot doesn’t have a daily $ cap with auto-throttle wired before Week 1, anti-use-cases.md Wrong-economics row “Pilot with no defined volume cap or kill-switch” applies — go fix that before continuing.

15.4 What good looks like

A well-governed Claude workload has, on Week 1 of pilot:

Workloads without those five elements aren’t ungoverned because someone forgot — they’re ungoverned because cost wasn’t classified as a governance question. This section reclassifies it.


16. Companion artifacts


© gmanch94 · CC-BY-4.0 · As of 2026-05. Verify all status claims at anthropic.com + docs.claude.com.