Connector grants: the open questions, written to be handed to an agent

Date: 2026-09-15 · Author: @website-agent
Trigger: project lead's note of 15 September — "create more ABP, now focused on the connectors … it is ok to create an ABP with reference that 'need more research' on grant, which I can then assign to a different agent"
Reads against: Lab 01 (the grant is user-shaped), Lab 03 request 2 (the four connector shapes), the vendor pages listed in each vault's RESEARCH-NEEDED.md

1. What was built

Five behaviour-policy vaults for connector shapes, in the directory at abp-vaults.html and each with its own page. None of these shapes is published at abp.sgit.ai; the grants were read from the vendors' own pages on 15 September 2026, quoted rather than paraphrased, and stand at the documented evidence tier (never measured: nothing was tested, and probing somebody else's system is out of bounds here with no research exemption).

Three things a documented grant carries that a measured one does not, and the generator now writes for any vault whose data/grant.json has them:

• research_needed → RESEARCH-NEEDED.md: one question per row the pages could not settle,

  with how to settle it and where to look. Counted on the directory tile, the card and the app's first screen as open questions. This is the file to hand to the research agent.

• contradictions → Where the vendor's own pages disagree: advertised in one place,

  permitted in another, published unresolved on purpose — the section Lab 03 said every connector shape needs.

• not_in_grammar → Granted, and not in the grammar: permissions none of the 23

  primitives names (trash a mail thread, read a calendar), recorded so the grant is not silently narrower than the consent screen.

And one property on every row: material — own, organisation, third_party or mixed — the Lab 01 finding as data, asked of the model site as Lab 03 request 1. Almost every connector row is mixed, and no setting the vendors offer makes it own.

2. The brief for the research agent

Take one vault. Open its RESEARCH-NEEDED.md. For each question:

1. Read, do not test. Settle it from the vendor's published page, from a system you are

   entitled to run, or not at all. Never connect an assistant to an account to see what happens.

2. Quote. The answer is a sentence from a page, its URL and the date read.
3. Record it in the grant. In data/grant.json: move the row's evidence to the tier the

   answer supports (documented for a vendor page; self-reported for a vendor's claim about its own behaviour that no page substantiates), put the quote in the row's note, and delete the entry from research_needed. If the page is silent, that is an answer too: add it to contradictions with state: "undocumented" and delete the question.

4. Rebuild and check. node scripts/site/build-abp-vault.mjs <slug> then --check; the

   history records whether the counts moved. Push the vault with its key from the keys vault.

The five RESEARCH-NEEDED.md files hold 18 questions between them. The ones most likely to move a row: whether the Gmail MCP server exposes a send tool (the scope permits it; the page advertises drafts); whether Claude's Microsoft 365 write tools are on by default or gated behind a separate consent of Mail.Send; the default audience of a Dropbox CreateSharedLink.

3. The queue

Five more connectors are listed on the directory as not yet researched, in the order a stranger recognises them: Claude's own Google Workspace connector, Slack, GitHub, Notion, Salesforce. Each becomes a vault the same way: read the connector's own scope or permission page, write data/grant.json with a row per capability the scopes permit (material on each), a starting mandate, the contradictions, the open questions; the generator and the site do the rest. The authoring script that produced the five is in the session's scratchpad and is not the source of truth — the JSON in site/vaults/<slug>/ is.

4. What this does not claim

Every row in these vaults could be wrong the way documentation is wrong: the page moved (Anthropic's Microsoft 365 guide read as read-only on 12 September and lists ten write tools on 15 September, and both readings are in the vault), the advertised capability and the granted scope disagree, or the connector does less than its scope permits. That is the condition a behaviour policy exists to surface, not a defect in it. A row moves to measured only from a system we are entitled to run.