Decide where the work belongs
Rank continuation risk
For each omitted item, record the decision it affects, the work likely to be repeated, and the cost of acting on a misunderstood conclusion. Prioritize missing evidence, scope, and stop conditions over wording that does not change review behavior.
Assess smallest repair
Identify whether a source link, revision, conclusion, caveat, unresolved question, owner, or next action would close the gap. Classify work as amend summary, attach evidence index, continue investigation, request context, or stop. Preserve the underlying result when only handoff detail is weak.
Set queue and owner
Choose one repair with expected format, reviewer, evidence cutoff, and acceptance trigger. Add a follow-up for broader template work if needed. Do not reopen the full investigation when a bounded summary amendment can make the decision reviewable.
What to carry forward
Return a ranked handoff queue linking each gap to receiver decision, repeated-work risk, evidence loss, owner, and smallest repair. The leading item should restore an actionable continuation path. Mark the result provisional when the underlying work or receiving authority is itself unclear.
Keep the decision with the work.
Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.
Create an account See the product workflow