`create.schedule.tenant`

Create something that outlives the session, on the platform (a routine, a scheduled trigger, a new session). Its effect is yes: undone.

What this id is made of

This is not a string. It is create↗.schedule↗.tenant↗, three nodes joined by three edges, and each of them has an address, a page and a JSON file. Follow any of them and you get the query for that word rather than a definition of it.

Node	Edge	Reads as
`create`↗	`has_verb`	this capability has the verb `create`
`schedule`↗	`acts_on`	this capability acts on `schedule`
`tenant`↗	`reaches`	this capability reaches `tenant`
`schedule`↗	`in_family`	this capability is in the `schedule` family
`yes`↗	`has_undo_class`	this capability has the undo class `yes`

The gloss above is a convenience, not the definition. A node carries no inherent meaning: what create.schedule.tenant is emerges from the edges traceable from it. The strongest case is tenant↗, where the deployment shapes that use it do not agree about what it means, and the page keeps the disagreement rather than averaging it.

In 3 of 17 published shapes

	Deployment shape	Barrier there	Known by	Whose material	Note
◐	Claude Code on the web (a remote session container)	setting (not a control)	self-reported	not stated	a routine or a scheduled trigger resumes this session or spawns another later: it outlives the container
◐	Claude, with the Gmail connector enabled (contributed by riskmandate.ai)	setting (not a control)	documented	mixed	a Gmail filter is a standing rule that acts on every future message without the agent present - labelling, archiving, forwarding - which is what this primitive names: "something that outlives the session, on the platform". The tool is on the directory listing (captured 2026-09-16); it is not on Google's reference page for the server (2026-07-21), and the scope that filters need, gmail.settings.basic - "See, edit, create, or change your email settings and filters in Gmail." - is not among the three lines on the consent screen. Whether the tool works under the consented scopes is open; the row records what is listed. Asked in the measured session, Claude said: "the Gmail connector I have access to only exposes labels/messages, not account-level settings like forwarding rules, filters, vacation responder, IMAP/POP config, or signatures" - self-reported, and against the listing.
●	A self-hosted n8n instance, reached with an owner-scoped API key (contributed by riskmandate.ai)	none (not a control)	measured	organisation	a webhook-triggered workflow was built, activated and executed. Activation is refused for a workflow with no trigger - a check on shape, not on risk - so the platform bounds nothing about what an activated workflow does.

	Barrier	What stands in the way	Is it a control
●	none	nothing in the way	no
◉	expectation	a rule in prose, enforced by nobody	no
◐	setting	a switch the agent's own account can flip	no
○	boundary	enforced above the grant, out of the agent's reach	yes

What the starting mandates say about it

The mandate says	Which mandates
authorised	A sandbox: build and run one AI-agent workflow
refused	A coding assistant in a container on the web, Chat in the browser, nothing connected, Find things in the inbox, draft replies, never send, What the agent inferred it was authorised to do, from one session
unstated	A coding assistant on my machine, The desktop app, with local tools switched on, Chat, with connectors switched on, A CI job on a hosted runner, A browser extension I installed, A scheduled job under a service account, A reader on my mailbox, A reader on my drive, Search our tenant, read-only, Find and read my files, An assistant over my Workspace, reading

Unstated is not authorised. A mandate that never mentioned a capability did not authorise it, and the delta on every example page counts it as excess and says which kind it was.

The capability grammar ↗ · This primitive as JSON ↗

Site index for agents ↗ · HTML version ↗