# Defining properties

A proposed set of organizational properties and the evidence needed to recognize them.

Concept ID: axiomao:defining-properties
Language: en
Status: proposed
Reference edition: 0.1
Canonical: https://axiomao.org/en/defining-properties/
Published: 2026-10-14

## Purpose, identity, and authority

Axiom AO proposes three foundational properties: a continuing identity, an explicit purpose, and a defined authority boundary. Identity links decisions and obligations to the same organization over time. Purpose supplies a basis for prioritizing work. Authority identifies what the system may decide, what it may change, and when another party must participate.

These properties should be inspectable. A mandate can state permitted activities, resources, owners, and escalation conditions. It also needs a way to change legitimately. If historical instructions remain available, the system must distinguish their historical significance from their present authority.


## Work and resources

Two further properties concern action: discretionary organization of work and access to resources adequate for that work. The organization can select or coordinate relevant tasks rather than merely repeat a fixed schedule. Resources can include compute, documents, tools, budgets, or access supplied by another party; owning money is not essential.

Actual capabilities depend on runtime permissions. A written instruction cannot grant a filesystem permission or a service account privilege. A useful description identifies both the intended boundary and the enforced boundary, together with what happens when an apparently permitted action is unavailable.


## Continuity and outcome assessment

The final proposed properties are durable obligations and assessment of outcomes. A system needs to preserve enough state to resume, resolve unfinished work, and avoid treating every restart as a new beginning. It also needs a way to determine whether an attempted action achieved the intended result.

These are architectural properties, not guaranteed performance. To recognize them, inspect a completed case and an interrupted case: which obligation persisted, which evidence supported acceptance, and which uncertainty remained unresolved? Independent review, multiple agents, databases, and particular message protocols are possible mechanisms rather than universal requirements.


## Sources

- [Wooldridge, Jennings & Kinny (2000). The Gaia Methodology for Agent-Oriented Analysis and Design](https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/people/michael.wooldridge/pubs/jaamas2000b.pdf)
- [Hübner, Sichman & Boissier (2002). A Model for the Structural, Functional, and Deontic Specification of Organizations in Multiagent Systems](https://moise.sourceforge.net/doc/publications/Hubner-sbia2002.pdf)

## Related

- https://axiomao.org/en/what-is-an-autonomous-organization/
- https://axiomao.org/en/autonomy-and-accountability/
- https://axiomao.org/en/evaluation-methods/