# Practical AI Workflow Review

Use this worksheet with Method Learn’s free path, **Decide what AI should—and should not—do**.

The aim is a defensible workflow decision, not automation for its own sake. Use a redacted or invented example while learning. Do not paste private, confidential, financial, health, access, or client information into an unapproved tool.

This worksheet is educational material. It is not certification, legal advice, privacy or security advice, professional authority, or a guarantee that AI is appropriate for the work.

## 1. Name the real work

- Workflow:
- Person responsible:
- Event that starts the work:
- Finished output:
- Person affected by the output:
- Current place where the work stalls:
- Why this workflow is being reviewed:

### Current steps

Write what happens now. Do not improve it yet.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

### Required evidence

What facts or sources must be present for the output to be correct?

-
-
-

## 2. Mark assistance and authority

For each step, choose one label:

- **ASSIST:** AI may prepare, organize, compare, summarize, extract explicit fields, or draft for review.
- **HUMAN OWNS:** A person must decide, approve, promise, publish, authorize access, or handle an exception.
- **KEEP MANUAL:** Assistance is not justified because the evidence is weak, exceptions dominate, review costs too much, or failure would be difficult to repair.

| Step | Label | Reason | Named human owner |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 |  |  |  |
| 2 |  |  |  |
| 3 |  |  |  |
| 4 |  |  |  |
| 5 |  |  |  |

### Decisions AI must not own

- Truthful claim or promise:
- Consequential choice:
- Access approval:
- Fairness, moral, legal, or professional judgment:
- Exception handling:
- Final publication or communication:

## 3. Define review before generation

Write checks that a reviewer can verify against evidence.

- [ ] Every stated fact matches a named source.
- [ ] No missing fact has been invented or silently inferred.
- [ ] No unapproved promise, price, timing, or outcome appears.
- [ ] Required fields are present.
- [ ] The named owner and next action are correct.
- [ ] Private information is absent unless its use is approved and necessary.
- [ ] A person reviews the result before it affects someone else.

Additional workflow-specific checks:

- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]

### Stop conditions

Return the work to a person when:

-
-
-

## 4. Set privacy, access, and failure boundaries

- Minimum data required:
- Data that must never enter the test:
- Approved tool or environment, if any:
- Minimum account or system access required:
- Person who can disable the assistance:
- What happens when the tool is unavailable:
- How an error becomes visible:
- Manual fallback:
- When test data and logs will be removed:

## 5. Test safe examples

Use redacted or invented information.

| Test | Case | Passed checks | Corrections needed | Review time |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Ordinary case |  |  |  |
| 2 | Missing information |  |  |  |
| 3 | Exception or edge case |  |  |  |

Do not count fluent wording as a pass. Compare the output with the evidence and acceptance checks.

## 6. Make the pilot decision

Choose one:

- [ ] **ASSIST ONE STEP:** The evidence and review boundary justify a small reversible pilot.
- [ ] **KEEP MANUAL:** Human handling is clearer, safer, or equally efficient.
- [ ] **STOP FOR NOW:** The workflow, permissions, evidence, or controls are not ready.

Reason:


If testing one assisted step:

- Pilot start:
- Pilot end:
- Safe examples used:
- Named reviewer:
- Acceptance checks:
- Stop condition:
- Corrections to record:
- Review time to record:

## 7. Review the pilot

- Did the result remain truthful and traceable to evidence?
- Did review catch errors before the output affected someone else?
- Was any private information used unnecessarily?
- Did the workflow become meaningfully easier after review time and corrections?
- Can a person run the work when the assistance fails?
- Who will maintain prompts, rules, examples, documentation, and access?
- Is continued use justified?

Final decision:

- [ ] Keep the bounded assistance.
- [ ] Revise and test again.
- [ ] Return the work to a manual process.

Person accountable for the decision:

Date: