# Review checklists

Use the checklist closest to your deliverable, then add domain-specific review where the consequences of an error are high.

## Document review

- Is the audience and purpose clear?
- Does the opening state the point or requested decision?
- Are claims supported, cited, or appropriately qualified?
- Are names, dates, amounts, quotations, and links correct?
- Are actions, owners, and deadlines unambiguous?
- Is jargon defined and terminology consistent?
- Is sensitive or unnecessary information removed?
- Does the final format render correctly?

## Research review

- Is the question and scope clear?
- Is the cutoff date visible?
- Are authoritative and primary sources preferred?
- Do citations support the nearby material claims?
- Are publication date and event date distinguished?
- Are uncertainty, disagreement, and evidence gaps explicit?
- Are facts separated from interpretation and recommendation?
- Did you open and inspect the most important sources?

## Data and file review

- Are the correct input versions identified?
- Does the output schema match the request?
- Do row counts, totals, formulas, dates, and units reconcile?
- Are duplicates, missing values, exclusions, and parsing failures reported?
- Were originals preserved where required?
- Does the artifact open in the intended application?
- Does a sample match the source material?

## Code review

- Does the change match the requested behavior?
- Is the diff limited to the intended scope?
- Does it follow existing project patterns?
- Are edge cases, error paths, and security boundaries covered?
- Are secrets and unsafe defaults absent?
- Were relevant tests, builds, or manual checks run?
- Is the result maintainable and reversible?
- Are deployment or migration steps documented?

## Communication review

- Are the recipients and sender identity correct?
- Is the purpose and requested action obvious?
- Does the tone fit the relationship and channel?
- Are claims and commitments authorized and supportable?
- Are links, attachments, and personalization fields correct?
- Is private information removed?
- Was the final rendered version approved?
- Is sent or delivered status actually confirmed?

## Image review

- Is the subject, crop, aspect ratio, and resolution correct?
- Were requested elements preserved and exclusions respected?
- Is embedded text accurate and legible?
- Does contrast and composition work in the intended placement?
- Are brand, accessibility, rights, and privacy requirements satisfied?
- Could the image misleadingly imply a real event or endorsement?

## High-stakes review

- Is qualified professional review required?
- Are authoritative sources and current rules confirmed?
- Are affected people, permissions, and downstream impacts understood?
- Is the action reversible, and is there a tested rollback?
- Has an accountable human approved the final decision?