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?