Deliverables for operations
- Task and protocol matrix
- Role-based session convention
- Expected prompt reference
- File-transfer handling notes
- Failure and escalation cards
- New-operator walkthrough

| Task | Likely path | Pilot evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Linux service check | SSH terminal | Identity, host trust, command boundary |
| Windows GUI administration | RDP through approved route | Gateway, display, clipboard, drive redirection policy |
| Appliance troubleshooting | SSH, Telnet only if explicitly required, or serial | Protocol approval, cable/port details, recovery |
| Remote file handling | SFTP/SCP or approved alternative | Permissions, partial transfer, data owner |
| Visual support | VNC where approved | Authentication, encryption path, session ownership |

No. Support in a client is not a reason to use a protocol. We document the minimum approved paths required for real tasks.
No. It should connect to them and improve the evidence an operator brings to escalation.
Yes, when serial access is a real support path and the physical or remote console ownership is clear.