AI Coding Tools Usage Charter
May 18, 2026 · View on GitHub
Template — Copy to
docs/ai-usage-charter.mdin your organization's docs repo. Adapt sections marked with[BRACKETS].Related: guide/security/enterprise-governance.md §2
Organization: [Your Organization] Applies to: Claude Code and all AI coding assistants Effective date: [DATE] Owner: [Engineering Lead / CTO / CISO] Review cadence: Quarterly Version: 1.0.0
1. Purpose
This charter defines how [Organization] employees may use AI coding assistants, which tools are approved, what data can be used with them, and who is accountable for compliance. The goal is to enable productive AI-assisted development while managing security, privacy, and regulatory risk.
2. Approved Tools
| Tool | Plan / Tier | Scope | Administered by |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | Team/Enterprise | All engineering work | Platform Team |
| Claude Code | Personal Pro | Personal dev only (no company data above INTERNAL) | Individual |
| [Other Tool] | [Plan] | [Scope] | [Team] |
Using non-approved AI coding tools on company systems is prohibited. If you believe an additional tool would benefit your work, submit an approval request to [engineering-lead@company.com].
3. Data Classification Rules
All data at [Organization] is classified into four levels. Your use of AI tools must comply with this classification.
| Classification | Examples | Claude Code permitted? | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| PUBLIC | Open-source code, public documentation | Yes — no restrictions | |
| INTERNAL | Internal tools, non-sensitive business code | Yes — standard config | Use company accounts |
| CONFIDENTIAL | Customer data (non-PII), business secrets, proprietary algorithms | Yes — Enterprise plan only, with approved config | |
| RESTRICTED | PCI card data, PHI, credentials, auth tokens, encryption keys | Never | No exceptions |
Hard Rules
- RESTRICTED data never enters an AI context window — not in prompts, not in files Claude reads, not as examples.
- Personal AI accounts (personal Pro subscriptions) may only be used with PUBLIC or INTERNAL data.
- Company credentials and API keys are RESTRICTED. Never paste them into prompts.
Technical Enforcement
Projects handling CONFIDENTIAL or RESTRICTED data must configure permissions.deny in .claude/settings.json to block AI access to sensitive files. See the Standard or Regulated tier config for ready-to-use configurations.
4. Approved Use Cases
The following uses of AI coding assistants are approved without additional review:
- Code completion and generation for approved data classifications
- Code review and quality analysis
- Test generation and mutation testing
- Documentation drafting and updating
- Debugging, root cause analysis, log analysis
- Architecture analysis of internal systems
- CLI scripting, automation, build tooling
- Refactoring and code cleanup
5. Prohibited Use Cases
The following are not permitted without explicit written approval:
| Prohibited use | Reason | Exception process |
|---|---|---|
| Processing raw PCI cardholder data | Regulatory (PCI DSS) | None — technically enforced |
| Generating code handling unencrypted PHI without security review | Regulatory (HIPAA) | Security review required |
| Autonomous deployment to production | Human oversight requirement | Approval from Eng Director |
| Using personal AI accounts for CONFIDENTIAL data | Data residency/privacy | Upgrade to company account |
| Sharing customer data as examples in prompts | Privacy, data handling | Use synthetic data |
| Bypassing governance controls (hooks, deny rules) | Policy violation | None |
6. MCP Server Governance
Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers extend Claude Code's capabilities and introduce additional risk surface. All MCP servers used on company projects must be:
- Listed in the approved registry (
.claude/mcp-registry.yamlin the platform config repo) - Pinned to an exact version (never
@latest) - Re-reviewed every 6 months or on major version bumps
Approval process: Submit a request with server name, source URL, intended use case, and data scope to [platform-team@company.com] or [#claude-code-requests Slack channel].
Unapproved MCPs detected in project configs will be flagged at session start. Developers have 48 hours to remove or seek approval.
7. Code Review and Attribution
AI Attribution
All pull requests where AI assisted in writing code must include an AI disclosure section:
## AI Assistance
- AI tool used: Claude Code
- Scope: [e.g., "Generated tests for auth module", "Refactored payment handler"]
- Human review: Reviewer checked logic, security implications, and edge cases
The standard Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com> commit trailer (added automatically by Claude Code) satisfies attribution for routine changes. Explicit PR disclosure is required for:
- Any change to authentication or authorization
- Any change to payment or financial logic
- Any database schema change
- Any new external API integration
Code Review Expectations
AI-generated code is not exempt from code review. Reviewers should apply the same — or stricter — scrutiny to AI-generated sections, particularly for:
- Security-sensitive paths (auth, crypto, access control)
- Data handling (PII, financial data)
- Edge cases and error conditions that AI tools often miss
8. Accountability
Developer Responsibilities
By using Claude Code on company systems, you agree to:
- Follow this charter
- Report suspected data exposure to [security@company.com] within 24 hours
- Participate in quarterly access reviews
- Complete AI tools onboarding checklist when joining or switching teams
- Not circumvent governance controls (hooks, deny rules, registry)
Team Lead Responsibilities
- Ensure projects are configured with the appropriate guardrail tier
- Review MCP registry quarterly
- Include AI charter in team onboarding
- Escalate charter violations per §9
Platform Team Responsibilities
- Maintain shared governance config (settings.json templates, hooks)
- Review MCP approval requests within 1 week
- Update charter when tools, tiers, or risks change
- Conduct semi-annual governance audit
9. Incident Response
If you suspect data exposure
- Stop the current AI session immediately
- Document what data may have been included in the context (which files, what prompts)
- Report to [security@company.com] with "AI Data Exposure" in subject, within 24 hours
- Do not attempt to investigate or remediate without security guidance
Charter violations
| Severity | Examples | Response |
|---|---|---|
| Minor | Forgot AI attribution in PR, used unapproved MCP briefly | Coaching, remediation |
| Moderate | Used personal account with CONFIDENTIAL data, bypassed a hook | Formal warning, re-training |
| Severe | Processed RESTRICTED data with AI, persistent bypass of controls | HR/legal involvement |
10. Compliance Mapping
This charter addresses the following compliance requirements:
| Framework | Relevant Controls | This Charter Addresses |
|---|---|---|
| SOC 2 | CC6.1 (Logical access), CC7.1 (Monitoring), CC9.2 (Vendor risk) | Data classification, MCP registry, audit logging |
| ISO 27001 | A.8.3 (Access restriction), A.8.25 (Secure dev lifecycle), A.5.23 (Cloud services) | Approved tools, governance tiers, data handling |
| HIPAA (if applicable) | Security Rule §164.312 (Access control, Audit controls) | RESTRICTED data prohibition, compliance-mode logging |
| PCI DSS (if applicable) | Req 6.3 (Security vulnerabilities), Req 12 (Policy) | PCI data prohibition, code review requirements |
| GDPR/CCPA | Data minimization, purpose limitation | CONFIDENTIAL/RESTRICTED classification, data scope rules |
11. Revision History
| Version | Date | Author | Changes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0.0 | [DATE] | [Name] | Initial version |
Questions or exceptions: [engineering-lead@company.com] | Slack: [#ai-tools-governance]