Build with apps and agents. / 14 min / 3-question quiz
Design the review around your agent.
Make uncertain results, exceptions, and ownership visible before an agent becomes part of everyday work.
11/ 20
A.
Alex · Your virtual learning guide
A little guidance. A clearer next step.
Follow the reading, unpack the idea, and put it into practice. At your pace.
What you will leave with
You will prepare a review rubric and an exception playbook for one agent responsibility.
01
Define a reviewable result.
Specify what a good result must contain and what information it should cite or reference from its approved context. Check accuracy, relevance, missing information, and whether the output stays within the job brief. A polished answer is not enough. Decide which results always need review and which decisions the agent must never make on its own.
02
Give exceptions a destination.
List predictable problems: incomplete inputs, conflicting records, inaccessible information, and a request outside scope. For each, define what the agent should return, who receives the issue, and what they do next. Avoid loops that repeatedly attempt the same blocked task. Establish a practical way to pause the workflow while the responsible owner investigates.
03
Review changes as well as outputs.
Keep a small set of representative cases and review them after changes to instructions, approved context, or access. Record the case, observed issue, and agreed correction. Separate changes to the agent’s job from one-off corrections to a particular request. Expand responsibility only after the owner reviews the relevant evidence and confirms the new boundaries.
Example to adapt
Illustrative example: an account briefing agent
A fictional team asks an agent to prepare a briefing from approved account information. When two sources show different renewal dates, the expected result identifies the conflict and links it to a reviewer. It does not choose the more convenient date. The reviewer resolves the source information before the briefing is used for a customer commitment.
Try it with your team
Create a four-case review pack.
Write one normal case, one missing-input case, one conflicting-source case, and one out-of-scope request. For each, describe an acceptable output and the action that would be unacceptable. Name a reviewer and the point at which the workflow should pause.
Check your work.
Put your understanding to the test
Your knowledge check.
Answer all three questions correctly to complete this lesson. Feedback is part of the learning; you can try again.