Review Briefs

Purpose

Review briefs make Atlas pages easier for humans to critique. They should help a reviewer decide whether a page is too strong, too vague, missing a confound, ready to promote, or ready to drive a new analysis.

Placement

Put the review brief near the top of a topic, claim, conflict, opportunity, or derived-product page. The brief should summarize what changed, why the page matters, what evidence is carrying the claim, and what review feedback is needed.

Recommended Structure

• What changed: the new evidence, synthesis update, or unresolved tension that triggered review.
• Why review matters: the downstream decision that depends on the page.
• Evidence to inspect: the shortest list of source projects, derived products, or reports a reviewer should check.
• Questions for reviewers: concrete prompts that can produce an edit, a narrower claim, a new analysis, or a promotion decision.

Detail Rule

Do not paste project reports into Atlas pages. Keep the first screen synthetic, then put project-specific metrics, caveats, and alternative interpretations in deeper sections where humans and agents can inspect them when needed.

Review Outcomes

A useful review should end in one of five actions: keep as draft, narrow the claim, add a caveat, create or update a conflict, or promote the page to reviewed. If none of those actions is possible, the brief is too vague.

How Agents Should Use This Page

When preparing a page for human feedback, add reviewer questions that can be answered with evidence. Avoid questions that only ask whether the page "looks good."