Place review before the consequence
Confirm customer-facing messages before they are sent and consequential record changes before they become authoritative. Reviewing a daily report after the actions have already happened is monitoring, not pre-approval.
Show the evidence
The reviewer should see the source input, proposed change, uncertain fields, and relevant rule. A confidence label alone does not explain whether a result is correct.
Budget the work honestly
Include the time needed to review normal outputs, investigate unclear cases, and repair rejected results. If the reviewer is also responsible for the original task, check that a new queue will not simply hide the same workload.
Give rejection a useful destination
Specify what happens after rejection: manual completion, a request for information, or correction and rerun. Preserve the reason for rejection so recurring problems can improve the process.
A reviewer needs enough information and authority to say no.