Human review is useful only when the reviewer has enough information, time and authority to disagree.
Match review to consequence
- Low-consequence, reversible drafts may need a quick shape check.
- External claims need source and policy review.
- Decisions affecting access, money, employment, safety or rights require a qualified owner and stronger evidence.
Review the system, not only one answer
A single good result does not prove that a workflow is fair or reliable. Review examples across languages, customer groups, uncommon cases and failure conditions.
Questions for the reviewer:
- Did the system use the permitted sources?
- Are important claims supported?
- Are uncertainty and missing information visible?
- Could the result disadvantage a person or group?
- Is the proposed action within policy and authority?
The reviewer must be able to reject the output without pressure to approve automation speed.