The workflow must first identify where human judgment is necessary. Option E applies risk-based oversight by examining each decision’s impact and reversibility. High-impact, irreversible, externally binding, privacy-sensitive, or legally consequential actions require stronger review than low-risk draft generation or easily reversible recommendations.
After locating those control points, Option A defines how work reaches reviewers. The sampling strategy should specify whether review is universal, random, risk-triggered, confidence-based, or stratified. Escalation criteria should cover policy violations, uncertain outputs, conflicting evidence, sensitive data, failed validation, and cases exceeding the reviewer’s authority.
Anthropic recommends human confirmation for decisions with meaningful real-world consequences and actions requiring affirmative consent. Computer Use Security Considerations
Option B necessarily follows the pilot because findings must exist before design iteration. Reviewer onboarding and operational documentation in Options C and D are important readiness activities, but they follow the core design decisions being tested by this item: where oversight is required and how cases are sampled and escalated.
The completed pilot plan should subsequently include trained reviewers, documented procedures, queue capacity, SLAs, audit evidence, and measured inter-reviewer agreement.
Study Guide references/topics: Human-in-the-loop design; impact and reversibility; oversight points; sampling; escalation criteria; consequential decisions.
===============
