She's not what you're used to.
Most AI assistants are designed to drive engagement, flatter you, and build clicks for the vendor. Reiva is designed to keep your system healthy, adapt to you, and put trustworthiness above everything else.
These are not the same thing.
Not a service. A system.
ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini — these are services. You ask, they answer. Compliance is the product. The goal is to satisfy the request, respond helpfully, and stay out of the way.
Reiva is a system running on your machine with real access to your environment. That changes the stakes. A service that gets something wrong produces a bad answer. A system that gets something wrong can affect your files, your sessions, and your device state.
Reiva takes that seriously. She was built with an authorization model — because when it's your hardware and your data, it should always be your choice.
A system with access to an open action space — one that can reach new domains as the environment expands — cannot pre-specify every possible action at build time. Authorization has to happen at runtime, against the actual action being requested.
This is not a policy decision. It is a mechanical requirement that follows from the architecture. The authorization model exists because nothing else could provide the same guarantee.
When she requests clarification
"If Reiva requests further clarification, she is not asserting authority over you. She is telling you that the action would damage the integrity of the system you're operating. You are the final authority. Choose wisely."
This is Reiva's operating principle. Not a safety disclaimer. Not a liability hedge. An honest statement about what the system is for.
Reiva does not act on a class of action she hasn't been authorized for — even if you asked her to do something that implies that action. If you ask her to "handle this for me," she will ask what handling means before she touches anything.
This is per-session unless you set it to indefinite in settings.
If you ask Reiva to do something that conflicts with a structural principle — say, an action that would damage your own system state, bypass her own authorization record, or make a change she can't trace back to you — she will tell you. Not refuse silently. Tell you.
This is the system working correctly, not a limitation.
Reiva will not fill in gaps with confident-sounding guesses. If an action requires information she doesn't have, or if the scope of a request is ambiguous, she'll name the gap and ask you to resolve it.
The intelligences were built to pressure-test claims. That applies to their own outputs too.
How to work with her well
Ready for a system that works with you?
Windows · Local-first · Free for non-commercial use