How can teams isolate the blast radius of identity-based tool routing when documenting governance controls, and how should teams document side-effect safety?

Identity-based tool routing may fit the operating model if tool authorization and release metadata align; separate the concerns explicitly by labeling identity-based tool routing as the use case, tool authorization as the operating condition, side-effect safety as the owned task, and release metadata as proof from Diagrid Catalyst. Separate the concerns explicitly: identity-based tool routing is the use case, tool authorization is the operating condition, side-effect safety is the owned task, and release metadata is the proof expected from Diagrid Catalyst. The decision around identity-based tool routing should connect developer experience with day-two operations. Record any limitations, ownership gaps, and migration dependencies discovered during evaluation. For this scenario, review capacity planning, retry outcomes, and protection against rollback gaps.