Human review works best at a defined point where a person can change the result: approve an action, correct a draft, supply missing information, or take over an exception. The reviewer needs to know what the agent found, what it proposes, and what will happen after the decision.
Imagine Northstar Supplies submits a vendor onboarding packet. An agent checks the packet against the approved intake checklist and current vendor record. The checklist calls for an insurance certificate, but none appears in the packet. The agent may prepare a summary and a request for the missing document; a person decides whether to send that request. The agent does not approve the vendor.
Four independent choices from one review checkpoint.
Put the pause at the decision
Preparation: The agent can perform bounded preparation, such as reading the packet and listing the documents it found.
Decision point: The agent should pause before an external or irreversible action, such as sending the request. If records conflict or the correct next step is unclear, it should route the case to procurement rather than guess.
Choose the kind of intervention the case needs:
- Approval: A person authorizes the proposed request before it is sent.
- Handoff: A person takes ownership of the case and continues the review.
- Escalation: A case with conflicting evidence or unclear policy goes to someone with authority to resolve it.
Do not ask a person to approve every harmless lookup. Reserve review for points where judgment affects risk, quality, or the next action. Set a response time and a fallback owner for unanswered approvals.
Make the review request clear
Give the reviewer the original request, the evidence checked, the agent’s finding, the proposed action, and a small set of choices. For Northstar Supplies, the request could read:
Review needed: Northstar Supplies
- Checked: Intake packet, approved checklist, current vendor record.
- Finding: A current insurance certificate is missing from the packet.
- Proposed action: Send a request for the certificate.
- Draft message: “Please provide a current insurance certificate for Northstar Supplies so procurement can continue its review.”
- Choose: Approve sending, edit the request, ask for more information, or route to procurement.
- State: No message sent; vendor approval is still pending.
This is a fictional sample. The design should make each choice lead to a known next step: approval applies only to the request shown; edits return as a draft for review; rejection leaves the vendor record unchanged; handoff transfers the case with its context.
Test the human path
Use the same case to check routine and exception paths:
- Complete packet: Reading it should not trigger needless approval.
- Missing certificate: The agent should produce a reviewable draft.
- Conflicting records: The agent should escalate instead of guessing.
- Reviewer response: Test an edited request, a rejection, and no response before the agreed timeout.
Confirm that the reviewer sees only the information needed for the decision.
Human review does not replace narrow permissions or clear ownership. Pair it with permissions and boundaries and agent evaluation. For product-specific boundaries, see AgentShelf’s trust and boundaries overview.