Skip to content

Tavryqen Knowledge Center

AI Use-Case Inventories: Keeping an Accurate Record of Where AI Is Used

A governance guide for maintaining a practical inventory of AI use cases, owners, data, decisions, dependencies, and review status.

Shamar Bennett September 2, 2026 Updated September 2, 2026 Reviewed 2026-09-02 Version 1.0 2 min read

Governance becomes difficult when an organization cannot answer a basic question: where is AI actually being used? A use-case inventory gives teams a shared record of AI-enabled systems and workflows so ownership, review, monitoring, and change decisions are based on current information.

Inventory the use case, not only the model

Record the business purpose, users, owner, system or vendor, model or AI capability where known, important data inputs, outputs, downstream actions, human review points, and affected processes. One model may support several use cases with very different risks.

Capture lifecycle status

Distinguish experiments, pilots, production uses, paused systems, and retired use cases. Include the date of the latest review and the event that should trigger another review, such as a model change, new data source, new audience, or expanded decision authority.

Connect the inventory to evidence

Link each use case to its risk assessment, approvals, tests, monitoring records, exceptions, and control owners where those artifacts exist. The inventory should point reviewers to evidence rather than trying to contain every detail itself.

Give someone responsibility for keeping it current

Define who can add, change, and retire entries and how teams report new AI uses. Periodic reconciliation with procurement, technology, security, data, and business owners can help surface systems that were not entered through the expected process.

Keep professional determinations with qualified owners

An inventory can support governance, but it does not determine whether a use case is legally permitted, clinically appropriate, financially suitable, fair in employment, safe, or compliant with a particular regulation. Those judgments require the appropriate qualified authority.

Related knowledge

Use this with AI Governance Control Owners, AI Human Oversight Plans, AI Governance Review Triggers, and AI Governance Evidence Packs.

References

This resource supports operational governance. It does not establish legal compliance or replace qualified legal, regulatory, clinical, financial, employment, safety, privacy, accessibility, or other professional review.

Put the guidance into context

Considering automation for your organization?

Tavryqen can help you examine the process, operational goals, security considerations, and governance boundaries before you decide what should be automated.

About the author

Shamar Bennett

Tavryqen authors contribute practical perspectives on responsible AI, automation, security, and technology transformation.