Record the Evidence Trail and Decision
Work through the explanation, apply it to the example, and complete the quick check before continuing.
A review should leave a useful record
For material work, looks fine is not enough. Another person should be able to understand what was checked, what changed, and what remains uncertain.
A practical review log records:
- Output version and date.
- Task specification used.
- Material claim or requirement.
- Source or method checked.
- Result of the check.
- Change made.
- Reviewer and approver.
- Remaining limitation.
- Final decision.
Four decisions
Accept
The output meets the specification and required checks for its intended use.
Accept does not mean true for every possible use. Record the scope.
Revise
The output has a clear, correctable defect. Change the output or specification, then review the new version.
Verify
A material claim remains unresolved. Do not use the claim as fact until suitable evidence is found.
Reject
The output is unsuitable, unsafe, outside scope, based on unreliable evidence, or too costly to repair. Use another method or stop the task.
A simple log
| Item | Check | Result | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Event date | Approved event sheet | Supported | Keep |
Free parking | No supporting source | Unsupported | Remove |
| Accessibility claim | Facilities record incomplete | Unresolved | Verify with venue owner |
| Registration link | Opened and tested | Supported | Keep |
Decision:
Revise before publication. Remove the parking claim and hold the accessibility statement until the venue owner confirms it. The communications owner must review the updated notice.
Record remaining uncertainty
An output may be usable with a clear limitation.
Example:
Accepted for internal planning only. Cost estimates use current draft prices and must be refreshed before purchase approval.
This is better than hiding uncertainty or presenting temporary information as final.
Corrections need a new review
Changing one sentence can create a new inconsistency elsewhere. Review the revised version, especially its material claims and final decision.
Quick check
When should an output be rejected rather than revised?
A. When one comma is missing. B. When it is based on unreliable evidence and repair would not make it suitable for the intended high-impact use. C. Whenever AI was used. D. When the reviewer dislikes the font.
Check the answer
Answer: B. Rejection is appropriate when the method or evidence cannot meet the task’s standard safely.
Remember
- Record the claim, evidence, result, change, owner, and remaining limit.
- Choose accept, revise, verify, or reject.
- State the intended-use scope of acceptance.
- Review the revised version again.
You are ready to inspect a deliberately flawed output.