ISO 42001 Annex A 6.2.7 Provide AI system technical documentation to interested parties
What it says
The organization shall determine what AI system technical documentation is needed for each relevant category of interested parties, such as users, partners, supervisory authorities, and provide the technical documentation to them in the appropriate form.
Quoted as published. Everything else on this page is written by Control Stack.
What it means
In plain EnglishThe organisation decides what technical documentation each group needs about its AI (artificial intelligence) systems and gives it to them in a suitable form.
Different people who deal with your AI (artificial intelligence) systems need different information to use them safely and understand them. The people who use the system day to day, the partners who build on top of it, and the supervisory authorities who regulate it all have different questions. This control asks your organisation to work out exactly what technical documentation each of these groups needs about each AI system, and then actually give it to them in a form they can use. For example, a hands-on user might need a clear operating guide, a business partner might need an interface specification, and a regulator might need detailed records of how the system was built and tested. The point is that the right people get the right level of detail, written in a way they can understand and act on, rather than everyone getting the same generic document or nobody getting anything at all.
Free. Save your status, tasks and notes.
Why it matters
If parties do not get the right technical documentation, users misuse the AI, partners integrate it wrongly, and regulators cannot verify compliance.
How to implement
The AI management lead lists every AI system in scope and the categories of interested parties that deal with each one, such as end users, business partners, and supervisory authorities or regulators.
For each category, the product owner writes down the specific documentation that group actually needs, for example a user operating guide for users, an interface specification for partners, and build and testing records for regulators.
The documentation author produces each document in a form that suits the audience, using plain language and the right level of technical detail so the reader can understand and use it without further explanation.
The release manager links documentation delivery to the system lifecycle so that whenever an AI system is launched or significantly changed, the relevant parties receive updated documentation at the same time.
The compliance manager keeps a simple register recording which documents were provided to which party, in what form, and on what date, so the organisation can show the documentation was actually delivered.
Keep it running
Review the documentation each time an AI system is launched or significantly changed so every interested party always holds a current version.
Evidence and audit
- Check 1 of 2What an auditor asks for
Ask for
the list of AI systems and the categories of interested parties identified for each, and check that users, partners, and supervisory authorities are all considered where relevant.
Look at
the documents prepared for each category and confirm the content and level of detail genuinely match what that audience needs rather than being one generic document for everyone.
- Check 2 of 2What an auditor asks for
Ask for
how documentation is delivered and in what form, and confirm it reaches the intended parties in a usable format rather than sitting unshared in an internal folder.
Look at
a register or records showing which documentation was provided to which party and when, and check it stays current as systems change.
Good evidence
clear, audience-appropriate technical documentation that is actively provided to each relevant group, kept up to date with the AI system, and supported by evidence of delivery.
Mappings
Closest match in ASD Information Security Manual: ISM-1178, Limit network documentation for third parties, which partially overlaps with this control.
ASD Information Security Manual: 3 mappings
This control partially overlaps ISM-1178.
Annex A 6.2.7 requires determining and providing AI system technical documentation to relevant interested parties in an appropriate form. ISM-1178 constrains what network documentation can be provided to third parties to only what is necessary, which directly affects how much AI system technical documentation (where it includes network/architecture details) can be shared externally under Annex A 6.2.7. ISM-1178 is a minimisation/need-to-know constraint on disclosure, whereas Annex A 6.2.7 is a positive obligation to provide suitable documentation to specific audiences.
This control partially overlaps ISM-2084.
Annex A 6.2.7 requires the organisation to determine what AI system technical documentation is needed for each category of interested party (e.g. users, partners, regulators) and provide it in an appropriate form. ISM-2084 specifically requires creating AI model/system documentation artefacts (e.g. model cards/system cards) covering characteristics, architecture, use cases and security risks, which are a common core input to the technical documentation Annex A 6.2.7 expects to be disseminated. ISM-2084 focuses on producing particular AI documentation content, while Annex A 6.2.7 focuses on tailoring and distributing documentation to different audiences (including potentially non-technical forms).
This control supports ISM-1730.
Annex A 6.2.7 requires the organisation to provide AI system technical documentation to categories of interested parties (such as consumers/users and partners) in an appropriate form. ISM-1730 requires producing and making available a Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) to consumers, which can be included as a component of AI system technical documentation packages distributed under Annex A 6.2.7. ISM-1730 is narrowly focused on component transparency for software supply chain risk, while Annex A 6.2.7 covers broader AI system documentation needs and audience-specific tailoring.
Mappings show how controls relate across frameworks. They do not imply full equivalence or certification.
Get help with this control
ISO 42001 training
Mindset Cyber runs PECB-accredited ISO/IEC 42001 training that maps directly to the AI controls in this library.
Turn this control into your AI policy
PolicyMint writes customised ISO 42001 policy documents for your business, audit-ready and exported in your branding (Word, PDF, Excel). Skip the blank page and the boilerplate that does not fit. First document free.
Draft your ISO 42001 documents