A Design Constraint Question for Developers
I am currently designing a third party app integration for ChatGPT using the official app mechanism.
The goal of the integration is to allow users to make complex decisions inside ChatGPT while interacting with an external product through an app connection.
While reviewing the current App Policy and integration model, I ran into a design constraint that does not seem to be explicitly addressed yet, but has significant implications for user alignment and trust.
Context: App Integrations and Assistant Reasoning
OpenAI App Policy today clearly defines important requirements around:
-
data access and user consent
-
least privilege permissions
-
security and misuse prevention
-
transparency of data sharing
From a developer perspective, this provides a solid foundation.
However, when building integrations that influence user decisions rather than just execute actions, another question becomes relevant:
How do we prevent app specific incentives from influencing the assistant’s reasoning once an app is connected?
This is not a theoretical concern. It shows up immediately in real integration design.
The Concrete Design Problem
Third party apps typically have internal goals such as:
-
conversion optimization
-
engagement optimization
-
retention metrics
-
preferred defaults
These goals are legitimate and expected.
The challenge arises when an app integration exposes information or structures that can bias the assistant’s reasoning context toward these goals, even unintentionally.
Examples include:
-
exposing preferred defaults
-
exposing internal recommendation order
-
exposing optimization logic that is not user specific
-
framing options in a way that reflects product success metrics
From a developer standpoint, this creates a tension:
The assistant is expected by users to reason primarily in their interest, but the integration surface may introduce app level incentives into the loop.
Why This Matters for Developers
When users ask ChatGPT questions like:
-
Should I do this now
-
Which option is safer for me
-
What would you recommend in my situation
they are not asking the app.
They are asking the assistant.
If users cannot distinguish whether the assistant’s reasoning is influenced by app specific incentives, trust degrades quickly, even if the integration is technically correct and policy compliant.
For developers building serious decision oriented integrations, this becomes a real product risk.
My Intended Integration Approach
In my case, the desired behavior is explicitly:
-
the assistant should reason only from user stated goals, constraints and values
-
the assistant should be allowed to warn, slow down or discourage actions
-
the assistant should be able to recommend inaction
-
the assistant should not optimize for app usage, conversion or engagement
Technically, I can enforce this myself by isolating reasoning and limiting what the app exposes.
However, doing this at the platform level would be a game changer, both for developers and for user trust.
The Open Question for App Policy and SDK Design
From a developer perspective, this raises a concrete question:
Are there existing or planned mechanisms in App Policy or the Apps SDK that help enforce a separation between app incentives and assistant reasoning context?
More specifically:
-
Is there a way to declare app incentives so they are explicitly excluded from assistant reasoning
-
Is there or could there be a read only reasoning boundary for decision support
-
Is there guidance on separating decision support from action execution within integrations
If not, this seems like a gap that developers currently have to solve individually.
Why This Is Relevant Beyond One App
This is not about restricting apps or limiting innovation.
Apps should continue to compete, optimize and differentiate.
The question is only about the assistant layer.
If ChatGPT becomes the primary interface where users reason about decisions, then preserving user aligned reasoning is critical.
From a platform perspective, a neutrality boundary would not be a feature, but a governance constraint that benefits the entire ecosystem.
Closing Question to Developers and Platform Teams
For those building or reviewing ChatGPT app integrations:
How are you currently handling the risk of incentive leakage into assistant reasoning, and do you see this as something that should be addressed at the App Policy or SDK level?