reviewer-protocol

Preventing self-revision after a code review rejection requires strict reviewer-driven lockout semantics. A coordinator enforces the protocol by reassigning the rejected artifact to a different agent or escalating it, validating that the new revision owner is not the original author.

A reviewer rejection protocol for artifact revisions is a governance workflow where a reviewer rejects work, triggering a coordinator to enforce lockout on the original author. The coordinator then mandates reassignment to a distinct agent or escalation to a new expert for the next revision cycle.

Enforcing lockout on an original author during a QA sign-off involves coordinator-driven validation that blocks the author from producing the next revision. The coordinator verifies the selected revision agent is different and maintains the lockout throughout the entire revision cycle.

Escalating a rejected artifact to a specialist instead of reassigning it is fully supported. Upon rejection, the coordinator can escalate the revision to a new expert, ensuring the original author remains locked out while the specialist generates the updated v2 artifact.

The reviewer lockout persists for the entire revision cycle. The coordinator maintains strict lockout semantics continuously, validating that the newly designated agent is not the original author until the current revision cycle completes.

The best way to coordinate independent code revisions is using a strict reviewer-driven governance protocol. This approach enforces rejection workflows with mandatory coordinator validation, preventing authors from self-revising by reassigning or escalating tasks to distinct agents.