Where Human Review Belongs in an AI Workflow

Review must be part of the work

Adding a final instruction to check an AI output can leave the review itself undefined. Who checks it, what do they compare it with and what happens if it is wrong? My recommendation is to decide those arrangements before introducing the tool into a workflow. A reviewer needs a clear task and suitable evidence, not merely a button labelled approve.

Find the consequence point

In a fictional team, an AI tool drafts an event information email from an approved brief. The important review point is before the message reaches attendees. The reviewer checks the date, location, access arrangements and contact route against the original brief. Polished wording is not evidence that these details are correct. Any unresolved detail returns to the organiser for confirmation.

Give the reviewer a basis for judgement

Keep the source material available and name the checks that matter. If the task is summarisation, compare the draft with the authorised source and look for omitted conditions or invented details. If the output proposes an action, check the evidence and who is authorised to decide. Use approved tools and information-handling arrangements. Do not upload confidential material simply because doing so makes drafting easier.

Make intervention possible

The UK Government AI Playbook discusses human oversight and accountability. For a small workplace process, a practical question is whether the reviewer can stop, correct or reject the output before it causes an avoidable problem. A rushed review without access to the source is weak control. The right arrangements depend on the consequences, the task and the organisation’s requirements.

Write a review agreement

Choose a low-risk fictional task and record the input, allowed use, review point, reviewer, checks and rejection route. Run one draft through that agreement and deliberately include an incorrect detail in a practice copy. Confirm that the review catches it. This is a learning exercise, not evidence that an AI system is suitable for every real task.

Source and editorial note

Author: Jefferson Otonbara Imgbi. Reviewed 8 October 2026. The recommendations and fictional examples are original RDE editorial learning material. The source below provides background, not endorsement of RDE.

UK Government: AI Playbook

Cover image: AI-generated illustrative scene created specifically for this resource.