# Agent Audit Trail (AAT) vs An Audit Record Format for AI Agent Authorization Decisions (Agent Audit Record)

The map lists them as complementary: sites and agents commonly implement both.

[9 Account](/category/account/) [Agent Audit Trail](/protocols/agent-audit-trail/) · [9 Account](/category/account/) [An Audit Record Format for AI Agent Authorization Decisions](/protocols/wimse-agent-audit-record/)

|  | [Agent Audit Trail](/protocols/agent-audit-trail/) AAT | [An Audit Record Format for AI Agent Authorization Decisions](/protocols/wimse-agent-audit-record/) Agent Audit Record |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Lifecycle step | 9 Account: Prove what happened; be judged | 9 Account: Prove what happened; be judged |
| Answers | Is there a standard, tamper-evident log format any autonomous AI agent can write its actions to, so a regulator, auditor or victim can later reconstruct exactly what it did and why? | What should a tamper-evident record of an agent's authorization decision contain? |
| Governed by | IETF individual Internet-Draft; not adopted by any IETF working group, 'not endorsed by the IETF' and has 'no formal standing' in the IETF process (datatracker's own disclaimer) | IETF individual Internet-Draft (the datatracker lists it as an individual submission, not a working group document) |
| Status (issuer's words) | Active Internet-Draft (individual submission), Intended status: Standards Track; not a Working Group document | Internet-Draft (individual), Intended Status: Informational; expires 19 April 2027 |
| Version | draft-sharif-agent-audit-trail-08 (2026-10-13) | draft-gilda-audit-agent-audit-record-00 (replaces draft-gilda-wimse-agent-audit-record-02) (2026-10-16) |
| Form / transport | document format | document format |
| Found at | none | none; a record format, not a discoverable service |
| Implementation | none found | none found |
| Evidence | 3 verified | 5 verified |
| Primary use case | Audit what an agent did | Audit what an agent did |
| Last verified | 2026-10-23 (current) | 2026-10-23 (current) |
| Specification | [https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sharif-agent-audit-trail-08](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sharif-agent-audit-trail-08) | [https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gilda-audit-agent-audit-record/](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gilda-audit-agent-audit-record/) |

## When to use which

- Choose Agent Audit Trail when your question is “Is there a standard, tamper-evident log format any autonomous AI agent can write its actions to, so a regulator, auditor or victim can later reconstruct exactly what it did and why?” and you accept its maturity: status "Active Internet-Draft (individual submission), Intended status: Standards Track; not a Working Group document", implementation none found.
- Choose An Audit Record Format for AI Agent Authorization Decisions when your question is “What should a tamper-evident record of an agent's authorization decision contain?” and you accept its maturity: status "Internet-Draft (individual), Intended Status: Informational; expires 19 April 2027", implementation none found.

Guidance is derived from the two records (question, status, implementation, prerequisites, pairings), not from opinion. Each record's page carries its numbered references.

## Read the full articles

- [Agent Audit Trail](/protocols/agent-audit-trail/): Is there a standard, tamper-evident log format any autonomous AI agent can write its actions to, so a regulator, auditor or victim can later reconstruct exactly what it did and why?
- [An Audit Record Format for AI Agent Authorization Decisions](/protocols/wimse-agent-audit-record/): What should a tamper-evident record of an agent's authorization decision contain?

Ask the MCP server to compare any two: the compare-protocols prompt, or get on both ids. [Connect](/connect/).

[agent-audit-trail.json](/data/protocols/agent-audit-trail.json) · [wimse-agent-audit-record.json](/data/protocols/wimse-agent-audit-record.json) · [Markdown](/compare/agent-audit-trail-vs-wimse-agent-audit-record/index.md)