human-approval-gate

To prevent AI agents from self-approving critical decisions, you can use a human verification gate that blocks self-approval and requires an explicit human message or independent reviewer for governance sign-offs.

Separation of duties in software safety ensures an agent cannot approve its own work. In agent governance, it requires human verification or an independent reviewer before proceeding with critical actions like component naming or PR review verdicts.

You enforce human verification for critical actions by implementing a gating mechanism that intercepts component naming and PR review verdicts, blocking progression until an explicit human approval message or independent reviewer sign-off is obtained.

Yes, you can require an independent reviewer for governance sign-offs. The human verification mechanism accepts either an explicit human message or an independent reviewer's involvement to satisfy the separation of duty requirement.

You need a human approval gate when your workflow involves critical decisions prone to self-approval, such as naming components, signing off on work, or issuing PR review verdicts across a multi-repo portfolio to ensure accountability.

The primary limitation of a human approval gate is workflow latency, as critical decisions like component naming or PR review verdicts are blocked until an explicit human message or independent reviewer is obtained to ensure software safety.