Reviews

Review the delivered result against the Task's acceptance criteria before treating a successful Run as a completed job. An Agent review can help find gaps, while the final reviewer remains responsible for the decision.

Evaluate evidence

Read the summary, follow important source links, and inspect the attached files or Library documents. Check what is missing or contradicted, not only whether the answer sounds confident. Use Browser use when recorded browser actions matter to the result.

For a new responsibility, check awkward cases deliberately: conflicting figures, an unanswered question, a request outside the brief, or an outdated source. For familiar internal drafts, you may spot-check established parts while examining changed or consequential claims closely.

Handle the review in Inbox with its decision context and actions. Open Task history when you want to investigate a particular result or compare earlier work, not because a decision requires leaving Inbox.

Choose the reviewer

An explicit Task reviewer takes precedence. Otherwise reviewer defaults resolve through the assigned Agent, Project, Goal, and Workspace. Human-review levels can fall back to the Human who created the Task. Assignment identifies who will judge the result. It does not start review by itself.

An explicitly assigned active reviewer takes precedence and receives the completion at every review level. When reviewer ownership comes from defaults, Routine Agent work has no separate completion gate, Standard and Elevated work use the stored reviewer, and Critical work routes to a Human lead or the Human creator. See Task specs for planning and the risk assessment that establishes the review level.

Review the delivered result

Completion review begins when an Agent's completion reaches a gated review level, or when a person or Agent moves the Task to In review.

When an Agent submits to a Human reviewer, it first checks the work in a fresh review session. An approval from that first pass sends the result and rationale to the Human's Inbox. A revision returns it to implementation. A rethink returns it to planning. Corrected submissions repeat the check before asking for Human attention.

A Human implementer proceeds directly to the assigned reviewer. When the final reviewer is an Agent, that Agent remains the single Agent review rather than adding another preliminary review.

Decide what happens next

Judge the result against the agreed criteria and evidence, rather than a new preference introduced after delivery.

Verdict	What happens
Approve	The Task moves to Done.
Request changes	The Task returns to In progress, with your notes routed to the implementer.
Reject approach	The Task returns to planning for a new Work Spec.

Explain a correction clearly enough that the next attempt can address it. The verdict remains in Task history, along with the decision to accept the result or send it back.

Keep pull-request review tied to the revision

Code delivery that requires a pull request has revision-bound review and delivery checks. Review the exact change that will be delivered using Pull requests and delivery.

The Inbox decision records your review of the reported revision. It does not merge the pull request.

A Task that uses a repository only as working context still follows ordinary completion review when pull-request delivery is not required.

Use direct completion deliberately

A person can move a Task straight to Done. That explicit choice bypasses completion review and the Agent-only check for unresolved questions or approvals.

It does not answer an open question or decide a pending approval. Those items remain in Inbox until someone handles them. Use direct completion only when you intend to take responsibility for that state change.