A contractor must evaluate a pilot model without keeping permanent production rights. Which access approach is most appropriate?

Issuing a time-bound access grant for pilot evaluation that expires automatically is the most appropriate approach for a contractor who must evaluate a pilot model without keeping permanent production rights. Just-in-time and temporary access give enough privilege for the evaluation window, then remove standing access when the pilot work ends. Automatic expiration reduces orphaned contractor rights on municipal AI systems after the engagement.

Assigning a renewable pilot role subject to quarterly manager recertification review fails because a quarterly cadence still leaves standing access live for up to three months past the pilot's actual end, and renewal depends on a manager remembering to act rather than access expiring on its own. Providing a scoped evaluation workspace with standing read access for pilot benchmarking fails because standing read access stays live past the pilot window with no automatic expiration, leaving persistent access instead of time-bound evaluation access. Issuing a project API key for pilot evaluation with detailed usage logging fails because logging only records what already happened; a key that keeps working after the pilot ends is still standing access, not a grant that expires automatically.

Exam caveat: Contractor and pilot access should be time-bound and scoped. Recertification cycles, standing read access, and logged-but-persistent keys are all distractors against access that expires automatically on its own.

Operational check: Issue the contractor a time-boxed pilot role with an automatic end date, confirm no renewable role or workspace with standing read access extends access past the pilot, confirm any API key is scoped and set to expire with the engagement, and verify access is gone after expiration without manual honor-system cleanup.