Review results and sources
Review a result against the work you asked Milo to do. A fluent answer can still contain an incorrect date, omit a condition or use an outdated source.
Start with the facts that would change your next decision.
Check the evidence
For each important conclusion, identify the source behind it. Open the original document or record when available and check its date, author and scope.
| Check | Question to ask |
|---|---|
| Identity | Is this the right customer, project or person? |
| Freshness | Does the source reflect the current state? |
| Conditions | Is the result subject to approval or another dependency? |
| Completeness | Is an important source or exception missing? |
| Action | Was the requested action completed, or only prepared? |
Ask for uncertainty to be visible
Separate confirmed facts from assumptions in this answer. Show the source for the delivery date and list anything that still needs an owner's confirmation.
If two sources disagree, ask Milo to show the conflict and its effect on the answer. A newer message might update a date without changing an earlier approval requirement.
Review before sharing
Check recipients, attachments and commitments before a message or document leaves your team. For a system change, verify the specific record and values that should change.
Use independent verification when an answer will inform a professional or consequential decision. Milo's output can be incomplete or mistaken; your review should match the stakes of the task.
If the answer is wrong, identify the source or condition it missed and ask for a revision. Keep the correction specific enough to verify.