Describe the actual human review of agent output

When to use this guide

A team labels an agent report human reviewed because an operator clicked send without inspecting its substance.

This is a fictional implementation scenario. The procedure below is Article 50 Hub's suggested working method, not a prescribed legal form, a customer result or a claim that every step is an additional statutory requirement.

Review procedure

1. Define the review scope and the competence needed for the task.

2. Record the content version actually examined and the reviewer's substantive decisions.

3. Separate formatting, routing and delivery approval from content review.

4. Update public wording to match the documented process and its limitations.

What the example review finds

• The operator approved delivery but did not review the report.

• A later generated paragraph was added after the review.

Keep these example observations separate from your own results. An unknown or untested state should stay open until the relevant evidence has been inspected.

Fields for your working record

• Content version

• Review scope

• Substantive action

• Post-review change

• Displayed claim

Use the downloadable blank worksheet linked on this page to connect the observed behavior with the deployed system. Add a reviewer, date, evidence reference, unresolved questions and a next action. The worksheet is editable locally and does not upload your records to Article 50 Hub.

Completion and handoff

Close the task only for the scope actually reviewed. Preserve the result that another authorized reviewer can reproduce, identify the owner of remaining work, and record a retest when the implementation changes. A completed worksheet is not a substitute for the underlying evidence.

Decision boundary

A review record does not automatically establish an exception or satisfy sector-specific professional duties.

The official references below provide legal or technical context. Resolve applicability and exception questions with the responsible qualified reviewer; use the product's tools to organize implementation work within that assessment.