Free AI learning · Mission 3 of 3
Prepare for human approval
Decide whether a bounded action is ready to put in front of its human approver. Readiness to review does not authorize execution.
Original fictional records and scripted feedback. No model is running; no message, code or approval is sent.
- 1First case
- 2Changed case
- 3Takeaway and quiz
Building software · First case · guided practice
A change ready for review
Decide the next step for an inspectable fictional code change. No external action is available here.
Fictional review packet · D13–D15
D13 · Change
Patch demo-b18 changes the offline basket total only. The diff is attached; no dependency or configuration changes.
D14 · Checks and fallback
12/12 units and the offline check passed on demo-b18. Accessibility/load checks were not run. Reverting this patch is the documented fallback.
D15 · Authority
The maintainer can review this patch for merge. No merge or deployment permission has been given.
What is ready for a human decision?
Compare the proposed artifact and its reasoning. You can use the feedback to revise your choice.
Why this decision matters
A workflow needs an explicit scope, an inspectable result, relevant evidence and a person with authority. Pause when a material fact changes. Human approval applies to the reviewed action, not every future action.
Choices stay in this page’s memory. Your browser may restore this page and its previous choices when you return. Reset this mission clears its choices, takeaway and lesson quiz attempts. On a shared device, use Reset this mission before leaving.
A change ready for review
Decide the next step for an inspectable fictional code change. No external action is available here.
Fictional review packet · D13–D15
D13 · Change
Patch demo-b18 changes the offline basket total only. The diff is attached; no dependency or configuration changes.
D14 · Checks and fallback
12/12 units and the offline check passed on demo-b18. Accessibility/load checks were not run. Reverting this patch is the documented fallback.
D15 · Authority
The maintainer can review this patch for merge. No merge or deployment permission has been given.
What is ready for a human decision?
Choose a proposal before reading its rationale.
Merge and deploy the tested patch
Merge demo-b18 and deploy immediately.
Needs revision. D15 does not authorize either action. D14's passing checks do not substitute for a maintainer's decision.
Request review without mentioning limits
Ask for approval and describe the patch as fully tested.
Needs revision. D14 explicitly names unrun checks. The approver needs those limits, not a broader testing claim.
Show the patch, evidence, limits and fallback
Present demo-b18's exact diff, scope, D14's checks and unrun areas, and revert fallback to the maintainer. Request a merge decision; do not merge or deploy.
Fits the records. D13–D14 make the bounded change inspectable and D15 names the decision owner. It is ready to request review; execution remains outside the present authority.
Changed case: the patch grew
Decide whether the earlier review still covers a materially different change.
New fictional review packet · D16–D18
D16 · Approval
Maintainer approved the demo-b18 basket-only diff for merge. Deployment was not approved.
D17 · New head
demo-c19 also changes login permissions and a dependency version.
D18 · Evidence gap
The recorded tests and revert note cover demo-b18 only. No review or tests cover the new changes.
What should happen before proceeding?
Choose a proposal before reading its rationale.
Stop and review the new scope
Do not merge or deploy demo-c19. Separate or justify the new changes, inspect the diff, run relevant checks and update the fallback. Request fresh maintainer review of the exact new head.
Fits the records. D17 changes the scope beyond D16. D18 leaves the new head untested and unreviewed. Earlier approval cannot travel silently to a different change.
Treat the branch as approved forever
Merge demo-c19 because the branch already received approval.
Needs revision. D16 approves a particular diff. The branch name does not extend approval to D17's new content.
Skip merge review and deploy instead
Deploy demo-c19 to see whether it works.
Needs revision. D16 excludes deployment and D18 supplies no checks for the new head. Production is not a substitute for the missing review.
Takeaway
- Show the exact action, destination and current artifact.
- Attach the evidence, known limits and any fallback.
- Name who can approve and what they are approving.
- After a material change, stop and return for review. A review request is not execution permission.
Paper practice is self-checked; independent demonstration has not been assessed.
Lesson quiz self-check
1 point for a correct answer; 0 for wrong or unanswered, out of 2 possible points. This paper version records no attempt or score.
A fictional documentation patch has its exact diff, link checks and known missing translation check attached. A maintainer must decide whether to merge; deployment is out of scope.
What should the review request include?
- Only the passing checks; call the patch fully verified.
- The exact diff, passing and unrun checks, scope and fallback; ask for a merge decision.
- A deployment request with no diff.
Answer and explanations
Needs revision: Only the passing checks; call the patch fully verified. The missing translation check is relevant information for the maintainer.
Correct: The exact diff, passing and unrun checks, scope and fallback; ask for a merge decision. An inspectable packet includes limits as well as positive evidence and names the bounded decision.
Needs revision: A deployment request with no diff. Deployment is outside scope and the missing diff prevents inspection of the proposal.
A maintainer approved fictional doc-p2 for merge only. New head doc-p3 changes an executable install command; its checks have not run.
What happens to the earlier approval?
- It covers any commit on the branch.
- It permits deployment of doc-p3.
- Stop, check the new command and request review of doc-p3 before merging; deployment remains unapproved.
Answer and explanations
Needs revision: It covers any commit on the branch. The approval was for doc-p2's content, not all future commits.
Needs revision: It permits deployment of doc-p3. Neither deployment nor the new content was approved.
Correct: Stop, check the new command and request review of doc-p3 before merging; deployment remains unapproved. The changed executable instruction needs fresh evidence and approval tied to the new head.