What exactly does “agents propose, humans approve” mean?

The agent can read your workspace and draft changes on its own, but any destructive operation — delete, bulk update, bulk archive — is routed through a propose/approve broker instead of running directly. The proposal shows exactly what would change, and a human approves or rejects it before it executes. A session that lacks destructive capability receives a structured approval-required result rather than acting.

Is governance only on the Enterprise plan?

No. The propose/approve broker, the immutable audit trail, RLS tenant isolation, and per-workspace AI budget gating are how the product is built — they apply on every tier, including the free tier. Enterprise adds controls like SIEM streaming and data-residency selection, but the governance foundation is not an upsell.

How is this different from the AI in Linear, Notion, ClickUp, or Monday?

Those products added AI on top of an existing app and ask you to trust the output. Planoda was built governance-first: the agent uses the same schema, permissions, and audit trail as humans, every destructive action is brokered for approval, and every model call is metered against a budget. Governance is the foundation, not a settings page.

Where can I see the underlying commitments?

The AI Trust Center covers the no-train guarantee, prompt-injection hardening, and model routing; the Security page covers RLS isolation, encryption, SSO/SAML/SCIM, and the audit log; and the DPA covers sub-processors and GDPR. This page explains how they come together as governance.

The governance wedge

Governance isn't a feature. It's the foundation.

Planoda is the only AI work platform built governance-first: agents propose, humans approve every destructive action, every read and write lands in an immutable audit trail, and every dollar of AI spend is metered against a per-workspace budget — all inside the Postgres row-level-security tenant boundary. Linear, Notion, ClickUp, and Monday bolt AI on and ask you to trust it.

Start free — governed from day one Read the AI Trust Center

Agent proposesdrafts the change
Human approvesor rejects, with the diff
Auditedimmutable, hash-chained
Meteredper-workspace budget

Governance in short

Planoda is the only AI work platform built governance-first — agents propose, humans approve every destructive action.
Every agent read, write, proposal, and approval lands in the same immutable, hash-chained audit log as human activity.
A per-workspace cost ledger preflights and records every model call, so AI spend never runs away; bring your own gateway key to bill providers directly.
Agents are clamped to an allowed-tools list and the Postgres row-level-security tenant boundary, so they can't reach another workspace's data.
Governance applies on every tier — including the free tier — not gated behind Enterprise.

How it works

Propose → approve → audit → meter.

The same loop runs behind every agent action — from a routine edit to a bulk archive.

01
Agent proposes
Working a task, the agent hits a destructive tool. Instead of running it, it emits a structured proposal describing exactly what would change.
02
Human reviews & approves
The proposal surfaces to a person with the full diff. They approve or reject. Nothing destructive runs without a human's call.
03
Action is audited
The proposal, the decision, and the resulting action all land in the same immutable, hash-chained audit log as human activity.
04
Spend is metered
The model calls behind the work are preflighted against the workspace budget and recorded after, so cost never runs away.

The four pillars

Real guardrails, not a checkbox.

Four guardrails, all shipped, all on every tier. Each links to the source documentation.

Propose / approve broker

Agents propose. Humans approve.

The agent reads and drafts freely, but every destructive action — delete, bulk update, bulk archive — stops at a broker and asks. The proposal surfaces exactly what will change so a person approves or rejects before anything runs. A session without destructive capability simply gets an approval-required result instead of acting.

Destructive tools gated by a single propose/approve broker
The proposal shows the exact diff before it runs
Auto-approved ops still record an agent.proposal.* audit row

Learn more

Immutable audit trail

Nothing happens off the record.

There is no separate, lossy AI activity feed. Agent reads, writes, proposals, and approvals are written to the same append-only, hash-chained audit log as every other privileged action in your workspace — one trail for people and agents, tamper-evident by construction, streamable to your SIEM on Enterprise.

Hash-chained, append-only — tamper-evident
One trail for people and agents, not two
SIEM streaming on Enterprise

Learn more

Per-workspace cost ledger

Every dollar of AI is metered.

Every workspace has an AI budget. The agent runs a preflight budget check before each model call and records spend afterward, so a runaway prompt can't quietly burn your bill. See exactly what your agents cost — or bring your own gateway key and bill providers directly on your own contract.

Preflight budget check before every model call
Post-spend accounting recorded per workspace
Bring-your-own gateway key to bill providers directly

Learn more

RLS + role-aware constraints

Agents are clamped to your boundary.

An agent can only call the tools its skill explicitly allows — clamped against the canonical tool registry — and every query it makes runs inside the same Postgres row-level-security boundary as the rest of your workspace. It cannot reach another tenant's rows even if it tried; the database enforces it, not the application.

Allowed-tools list clamped to the canonical registry
Queries scoped by Postgres RLS, enforced in the DB
Grant, restrict, or revoke a tool everywhere at once

Learn more

Teams of agents, not one monolithic AI.

Each workspace can run multiple agents with role-aware constraints — a triage agent, a planning agent, an audit agent — each scoped to its own tools and the same RLS boundary. They coordinate through the product's real schema, and every handoff is on the record. No competitor governs a team of agents this way.

How we compare

Who actually governs their agents?

Who actually governs their agents?
Capability	Planoda	Linear	Notion	ClickUp	Monday
Propose/approve broker for destructive agent actions	Included	Not included	Not included	Not included	Partial
Agent actions in the same immutable audit log as people	Included	Partial	Add-on	Partial	Partial
Per-workspace AI cost ledger (preflight + post-spend)	Included	Not included	Not included	Credits	Credits
Bring-your-own model gateway key	Included	Not included	Not included	Not included	Partial
Agents run inside row-level-security tenant boundary	Included	Partial	Partial	Partial	Partial
Scoped, revocable tools from one registry	Included	Not included	Not included	Not included	Not included
Governance included in every tier (not gated to Enterprise)	Included	Not included	Not included	Not included	Not included

Propose/approve broker for destructive agent actions

Planoda: Included
Linear: Not included
Notion: Not included
ClickUp: Not included
Monday: PartialPartial

Agent actions in the same immutable audit log as people

Planoda: Included
Linear: PartialPartial
Notion: Add-onAdd-on
ClickUp: PartialPartial
Monday: PartialPartial

Per-workspace AI cost ledger (preflight + post-spend)

Planoda: Included
Linear: Not included
Notion: Not included
ClickUp: CreditsCredits
Monday: CreditsCredits

Bring-your-own model gateway key

Planoda: Included
Linear: Not included
Notion: Not included
ClickUp: Not included
Monday: PartialPartial

Agents run inside row-level-security tenant boundary

Planoda: Included
Linear: PartialPartial
Notion: PartialPartial
ClickUp: PartialPartial
Monday: PartialPartial

Scoped, revocable tools from one registry

Planoda: Included
Linear: Not included
Notion: Not included
ClickUp: Not included
Monday: Not included

Governance included in every tier (not gated to Enterprise)

Planoda: Included
Linear: Not included
Notion: Not included
ClickUp: Not included
Monday: Not included

FAQ

Governance, answered.

What every security and procurement review asks about agent autonomy — answered plainly.

The research behind thisThe State of AI in Project Management 2026Our AI-maturity rubric scores tools on governance, agent autonomy, and surface coverage — and finds governance is the clearest gap.

Start governed

Autonomy you can actually trust.

Put a real agent in front of real data — under propose/approve, a full audit trail, and a budget you control. Start free; governance is on from the first workspace.

Create your workspace Read the AI Trust Center

Governance isn't a feature. It's the foundation.

Teams of agents, not one monolithic AI.

Capability

Planoda

Linear

Notion

ClickUp

Monday

Propose/approve broker for destructive agent actions

Partial

Agent actions in the same immutable audit log as people

Partial

Add-on

Partial

Per-workspace AI cost ledger (preflight + post-spend)

Credits

Bring-your-own model gateway key

Partial

Agents run inside row-level-security tenant boundary

Partial

Scoped, revocable tools from one registry

Governance included in every tier (not gated to Enterprise)

Governance isn't a feature. It's the foundation.

Propose → approve → audit → meter.

Agent proposes

Human reviews & approves

Action is audited

Spend is metered

Real guardrails, not a checkbox.

Agents propose. Humans approve.

Nothing happens off the record.

Every dollar of AI is metered.

Agents are clamped to your boundary.

Teams of agents, not one monolithic AI.

Who actually governs their agents?

Governance, answered.

What exactly does “agents propose, humans approve” mean?

Is governance only on the Enterprise plan?

How is this different from the AI in Linear, Notion, ClickUp, or Monday?

Where can I see the underlying commitments?

Autonomy you can actually trust.

Governance isn't a feature. It's the foundation.

Propose → approve → audit → meter.

Agent proposes

Human reviews & approves

Action is audited

Spend is metered

Real guardrails, not a checkbox.

Agents propose. Humans approve.

Nothing happens off the record.

Every dollar of AI is metered.

Agents are clamped to your boundary.

Teams of agents, not one monolithic AI.

Who actually governs their agents?

Governance, answered.

What exactly does “agents propose, humans approve” mean?

Is governance only on the Enterprise plan?

How is this different from the AI in Linear, Notion, ClickUp, or Monday?

Where can I see the underlying commitments?

Autonomy you can actually trust.