Human Review Gate

Reviewing a draft in chat costs more the better the draft gets. You describe an edit in prose, wait for the agent to apply it, then re-read the whole piece to check it understood you. Three small changes become three round-trips and a full re-read. And there is no way to say "this claim needs a source" or "does this land?" without derailing the edit loop, because everything you type is treated as an instruction.

The Human Review Gate moves that work onto a page. The agent opens a review session, hands you a link, and blocks. You read the draft in the real post template, change what you want changed, say what you want said, and press Send once.

What you get on the page

The draft renders in the live post template, with the real typography, spacing, and media. You are judging the thing itself, not a markdown approximation of it.

• Edit in place. Click any paragraph and it becomes its markdown source, right where it sits. Change it, click away, and it renders again. Empty it out and the block is gone.
• Comment on the exact words. Select any span of text and leave a note attached to that span. It shows in the rail on the right, highlighted where it belongs. A comment does not have to be an instruction: "needs a source" and "does this land?" are useful things to say and they no longer cost you an edit cycle.
• Comment on things that are not text. The hero image and other non-text elements are individually selectable, so you can say what is wrong with the picture without describing which picture you mean.
• Delete without explaining. Mark an element for deletion and move on. The deletion travels as an explicit operation, so nothing depends on the agent inferring intent from a sentence.
• Resolve as you go. Comments can be resolved and unresolved, and they survive a reload. You can leave the tab, come back, and pick up where you were.

Nothing is sent until you press Send. Then the whole batch goes back at once: the edits, the comments, and the deletions.

What the agent receives

Edits come back as a positional diff, not a rewritten body. Only the blocks you actually touched appear in the payload. That distinction matters more than it sounds: a full-body replacement invites the agent to re-read everything and quietly restyle paragraphs you never looked at. An operation list says exactly what changed and leaves the rest provably alone.

Comments come back anchored, each carrying the passage it was written about. The agent applies the diff verbatim, treats your comments as instructions, honours the deletions, and re-runs the proofreader before anything is published.

Comments that survive edits

An anchor is stored as the quoted text plus a window of the words around it, not as a character position. Character positions are the obvious approach and the wrong one: edit a paragraph near the top of a post and every position below it shifts, so every comment underneath now points confidently at the wrong words. That is the worst way for a review tool to fail, because it fails silently.

Instead, each comment is re-located when the page loads. If the text is still there it re-attaches, even if it has moved because you inserted three paragraphs above it. If the wording drifted slightly it re-matches and says so. And if the text it was about is genuinely gone, the comment is marked orphaned and shown as orphaned, rather than being re-homed onto whatever now occupies that spot. You always know which of those happened.

Access and expiry

The review link carries its own access token, so there is no login step. Open it on your phone, on a second machine, wherever you actually read.

Links expire, 24 hours by default. That is deliberate: the agent is waiting on this session, and a link that never expires is a way to wedge it forever. An abandoned review resolves on its own and reports itself as expired rather than blocking indefinitely. Re-opening review for the same post returns the session you already have instead of minting a second link, so two conflicting sets of edits can never be submitted against the same draft.

Comments live with the session and expire with it. They are working notes for the review in front of you, not a permanent editorial record attached to the published post.

Using it from an agent

Two tools drive the gate:

• create_review_session takes a post UUID and returns the review URL. Give the URL to the reviewer.
• get_review_feedback reads the session. It returns pending while you are still working, submitted with the full {diff, comments, deletions} batch once you press Send, and expired if the link lapsed.

An agent that has opened a review session should not publish that post until the feedback comes back and has been applied.