Hi Josef,
Richard has warned about this as well, on the very homepage of the AFT site, with a bolded Warning sign and different text color to emphasize the importance:
The second tooltip (after “undertaken”) explains why:
If Andrew goes ahead with his unilateral command to effectively do whatever he (self-centrically) wants without regards to any consequences and without the capacity for anybody else to do anything whatsoever to change his mind about any of it, without pure intent in place… the effect will most likely be for that “wayward self” to… go wayward 
.
It is the self-less/self-sacrificial following of pure intent (which is outside of the human condition) which is what ensures the actualism method can safely be employed.
This is not a matter of gate-keeping but rather an advising of what works and what doesn’t. All one has to do is make that connection, allow pure intent into one’s life, and follow that, and then one can safely give oneself permission to feel happy & harmless come-what-may.
Pure intent will ensure that sensibility will prevail when faced with choices, decisions, consequences, etc. The way forward is not one of completely ignoring everybody other person on the planet. Anytime more than one person (ie you yourself) is involved, sensibility dictates that everyone be taken into account. And it does not come with a moralistic ‘having to’ cater to other people’s unreasonable whims, either… with that sensibility comes the sensibility of knowing when not to do that.
It would be impossible to write out rules or guidelines for every possible scenario. With pure intent it will all work out. Without it… it will not!
I don’t think this is really a very high bar, as in a difficult thing to do. One just has to know that one has to do it and then make the commitment to actually try. Why wait and delay by trying something else (something inferior) first?
Cheers,
Claudiu