Human Review Requirements
When to Use
Use this when you need to understand what "human review" actually means for AI-generated code — the minimum standard before you can honestly say you've reviewed the code.
Decision
| Human Review IS | Human Review IS NOT |
|---|---|
| Understanding the problem being solved | Running the code and seeing if it works |
| Reading every line and knowing why it's there | Scanning code quickly for obvious errors |
| Verifying API calls against Drupal documentation | Trusting AI's assertion that "this is correct" |
| Testing edge cases and error conditions | Running it once with test data |
| Questioning whether the approach is simplest | Accepting the first solution that works |
| Being able to defend every technical choice | Saying "the AI chose this approach" |
Minimum review standard by disclosure level:
| Disclosure Level | Minimum Review Standard |
|---|---|
| AI Assisted Code | Read all code, verify API usage, run tests, ensure you understand everything |
| AI Generated Code | All of the above + verify every API call exists, test edge cases thoroughly, question the approach |
| Vibe Coded | All of the above + consider rewriting from scratch; if you can't review at "AI Generated" level, don't submit |
Pattern
The "Senior Developer" Test — ask these six questions:
- "What does this code do?" — Explain in your own words, not the AI's words
- "Why this approach?" — Know the alternatives and why this one was chosen
- "What happens if [input] is [edge case]?" — Know the behavior for unexpected inputs
- "What would a malicious user try?" — Consider security implications
- "Is there a simpler way?" — AI frequently over-engineers; apply the "isn't CSS simpler?" test
- "What breaks if this code is wrong?" — Understand the blast radius
If you can answer all six confidently, you've reviewed the code.
Common Mistakes
- Wrong: Confusing "it works" with "it's correct" → Right: Working code can still create unnecessary technical debt and maintenance burden
- Wrong: Trusting AI's confidence → Right: AI presents solutions as "production ready" regardless of correctness; you must be the skeptic
- Wrong: Reviewing AI code less carefully than human code → Right: AI code deserves MORE scrutiny because it may contain subtle issues that look correct but aren't
- Wrong: Not starting fresh when confused → Right: If you've been going back and forth with AI and things aren't making sense, start a new session — context poisoning is real