Decide where human approval belongs.

Identify actions that move money, disclose restricted information, affect a person's rights or change physical operations. A convenient interface does not reduce the consequences of the action.

Write down what the workflow may prepare, what it may execute and what it must never do. Permissions should follow this scope. Do not rely on a prompt alone as proof that access boundaries are enforced.

A reviewer needs the proposed action, relevant source, scope of authority and visible uncertainty. A generic approve button without context can turn oversight into a formality.

Define the response when the reviewer declines, evidence conflicts or no authorised reviewer is available. The workflow should pause or escalate rather than invent an approval or expand its own scope.

Clinical, financial, legal and safety-critical decisions need appropriate professional and regulatory assessment. Administrative assistance is not permission to automate those decisions.