Manual Review UI

Purpose

This page documents manual review interfaces as bounded, human-facing tools used to inspect, annotate, and contextualize flagged signals. It defines interpretation constraints so that UI exposure is not treated as system-level judgment or outcome.

Interpretation Rules

Manual review interfaces present contextual information to reviewers without asserting correctness, priority, or enforcement relevance.

The presence of a signal or flag in the interface must be interpreted as a prompt for inspection, not as a conclusion or decision.

Disallowed Inferences

Do not infer user intent, violation, or outcome solely from items surfaced in a manual review interface.

Do not interpret reviewer visibility or UI prominence as an indication of severity, certainty, or system confidence.

Common Failure Patterns

Treating UI-exposed signals as pre-validated or system-approved conclusions.

Assuming reviewer interaction implies enforcement, confirmation, or escalation.

Boundary Conditions

Manual review interfaces are limited to presentation and annotation. They do not perform detection, scoring, aggregation, or decision-making.

This page does not define reviewer policies, operational procedures, or outcome handling.

Non-Guarantees

The existence of a manual review interface does not guarantee accuracy, completeness, fairness, or consistency of human review outcomes.

Reviewer actions or annotations do not imply correctness or system-level validation.

Validation Checklist

Are UI elements clearly separated from decisions or enforcement outcomes?

Are signals presented as contextual prompts rather than conclusions?

Are reviewer interactions framed as annotations, not confirmations?