Home › AI Agents & Workflows › EU AI Act Check
Orientation in eight questions

EU AI Act Check for providers and deployers

In a few minutes, assess how clearly risk classes, prohibited practices, roles, transparency, human oversight, documentation and GPAI are organised. The evaluation identifies initial priorities without collecting personal data.

A transparent quick check, not an audit

The check follows Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act) as published in the Official Journal. The Commission additionally explains transparency duties under Article 50 and the risk-based regulatory framework. Scoring is explicit: Yes = 3, Partly = 2, Unknown = 1, No = 0. The result provides orientation and is neither an audit, a conformity assessment, a registration nor legal advice. The regulation text remains binding.

Evidence Review · 8 questions
Step 1 of 2
Step 1: Classification and roles
01 · Inventory and risk classIs it documented, for every AI system used or placed on the market, whether it is prohibited, high-risk, subject to transparency duties, or a general-purpose AI model?

Requirement from the risk-based structure of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Articles 5, 6 and 50 and Chapter V) and the Commission overview of the AI regulatory framework.

02 · Prohibited practicesHas it been verified that no AI practices under Article 5 are used, including prohibited emotion recognition in the workplace, prohibited biometric categorisation and social scoring?

Requirement from Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (prohibited AI practices).

03 · High-risk and Annex IIIHave use cases that may be high-risk under Article 6 and Annex III (for example employment, essential services, biometrics or critical infrastructure) been identified: or has it been documented that no such purposes exist?

Requirement from Article 6 and Annex III of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689.

04 · Provider and deployerIs it clear for each AI system whether the organisation places it on the market or puts it into service as a provider, or uses it under its own authority as a deployer, including duties in the event of a substantial modification?

Requirement from the definitions and duties in Articles 3, 16, 25 and 26 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689.

Step 2: Transparency, oversight and GPAI
05 · TransparencyAre natural persons informed when they interact with an AI system, and is synthetic image, audio, video or text content marked so that it is recognisable under Article 50?

Requirement from Article 50 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689; Commission explanation of the transparency obligations under Article 50.

06 · Human oversightIs human oversight with assigned, competent persons established under Article 14 or Article 26 for high-risk systems, where present, and for operational use?

Requirement from Articles 14 and 26 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689; additionally AI literacy under Article 4.

07 · DocumentationIs technical documentation under Article 11 and a quality-management system under Article 17 available for high-risk systems you provide: or, as a deployer, instructions, logs and monitoring under Article 26?

Requirement from Articles 11, 17 and 26 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689.

08 · GPAIIs a general-purpose AI model provided or integrated into your own systems, and are the duties under Article 53, and, in the case of systemic risk, Article 55, addressed or documented as not applicable?

Requirement from Chapter V of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Articles 51 to 55 on general-purpose AI models).

Regulatory context and target groups

For deployers

Organisations that use AI agents, chatbots or workflows under their own authority gain an initial view of inventory, transparency and human oversight: independently of a high-risk conformity assessment.

For providers and governance

The check helps prioritise gaps in roles, documentation, GPAI and prohibited practices before systems are placed on the market or extended in regulated processes.

Develop AI Act evidence with robust governance

Discuss risk classes, transparency or human oversight with our advisory team.

Contact us