Post-LLM guardrail with hard-rule overrides

This recipe shows how to combine an LLM classifier with a deterministic guardrail layer. The LLM provides nuanced judgment for ambiguous cases; hard rules act as a safety net for unambiguous policy violations, overriding the LLM's verdict regardless of what it concluded.

The pattern answers a real problem: LLMs can be manipulated via prompt injection or hallucinate outright. For any decision with real consequences — content moderation, access control, transaction approval — you shouldn't rely on the LLM alone. Hard rules catch clear-cut cases deterministically; the LLM handles everything in the grey zone. Critically, when a hard rule fires, the LLM's original reasoning is preserved inside the override so every decision remains auditable.

The recipe uses a content moderation scenario: user-submitted text is classified as safe, review, or block. Hard rules override to block when contact information or banned keywords are detected, regardless of what the LLM concluded.

Prerequisites​

• Python 3.10+
• uv
• A running Temporal server: temporal server start-dev
• ANTHROPIC_API_KEY environment variable set

Run it​

uv sync

# Terminal 1 — start the worker
uv run python -m worker

# Terminal 2 — submit two example workflows
uv run python -m start_workflow

Expected output​

--- Example 1: Hard rule override ---
Input: 'Great product! Contact me at john.doe@example.com for a special deal.'
Classification: block
Overridden by hard rule: True
Reasoning: Hard rule: contains email address (privacy policy violation).

[LLM classified as 'safe' — reasoning: The message is promotional but does not appear harmful.]

--- Example 2: LLM verdict stands ---
Input: 'I really enjoyed the hiking trail last weekend. The views were amazing!'
Classification: safe
Overridden by hard rule: False
Reasoning: Positive personal experience with no policy concerns.

In Example 1, the LLM's classification and reasoning are preserved inside brackets — the override is fully auditable.

Architecture​

• Models (models/):
  • signals.py: ContentSignals — the text and metadata being classified
  • verdict.py: LLMVerdict (the LLM's raw classification, also used as the tool's input schema) and Verdict (adds overridden_by_hard_rule)
• Guardrails (guardrails/hard_rules.py): pure functions that check content against banned keywords, phone numbers, and email addresses, and escalate the verdict to block when one matches
• Activity (activities/classify.py): calls Claude via a forced tool call to get a structured LLMVerdict, then applies the hard rules
• Workflow (workflows/classify_workflow.py): orchestrates the single classify Activity call with a 3-attempt retry policy
• Scripts:
  • worker.py: runs the Temporal Worker
  • start_workflow.py: runs the two examples shown in Expected output

Key patterns​

Forcing a structured verdict from the LLM​

The Activity forces Claude to call a single tool, so the response is always a well-formed LLMVerdict instead of free-form text to parse:

_SUBMIT_VERDICT_TOOL = {
    "name": "submit_verdict",
    "description": "Submit your content moderation classification.",
    "input_schema": LLMVerdict.model_json_schema(),
}

response = await client.messages.create(
    ...
    tools=[_SUBMIT_VERDICT_TOOL],
    tool_choice={"type": "tool", "name": "submit_verdict"},
)

Overriding while preserving the original reasoning​

apply_hard_rules never discards the LLM's own verdict — a rule can only escalate a verdict to block, and when it does, the LLM's reasoning is embedded in the result so the override stays auditable:

def apply_hard_rules(signals: ContentSignals, llm_verdict: Verdict) -> Verdict:
    if llm_verdict.classification == "block":
        return llm_verdict  # already blocked — nothing to override

    hard = _hard_block(signals)
    if hard is None:
        return llm_verdict  # no rule fired — LLM verdict stands

    return Verdict(
        classification=hard.classification,
        confidence=hard.confidence,
        overridden_by_hard_rule=True,
        reasoning=(
            f"{hard.reasoning}\n\n"
            f"[LLM classified as '{llm_verdict.classification}' — "
            f"reasoning: {llm_verdict.reasoning}]"
        ),
    )

Non-retryable Anthropic errors​

Permanent client errors (bad request, authentication, permission-denied, not-found, unprocessable-entity) are classified as non-retryable so the Workflow doesn't keep retrying a request that can never succeed:

except (
    anthropic.BadRequestError,
    anthropic.AuthenticationError,
    anthropic.PermissionDeniedError,
    anthropic.NotFoundError,
    anthropic.UnprocessableEntityError,
) as exc:
    raise ApplicationError(str(exc), type=exc.__class__.__name__, non_retryable=True) from exc

Extensions​

This pattern can be extended to:

• Add more hard rules (regex, allow/deny lists, PII detectors) without touching the LLM prompt
• Log every override to a compliance or audit sink for review
• Route review verdicts to a human approval step — see Human-in-the-loop AI agent