Rule 52 guide
AI human-review checklist for work that cannot leave the organization unchecked. The policy says review is required. The checklist tells reviewers what to actually check.
Human review is where AI policy becomes operating practice. Without a checklist, review often means “someone looked at it.” That is not enough for client work, board materials, grant narratives, public claims, HR documents, or regulated workflows.
What reviewers should verify
What reviewers should verify
- Source material and factual accuracy.
- Sensitive or confidential data exposure.
- Client, funder, board, regulator, or public-facing claims.
- Legal, privacy, cybersecurity, clinical, tax, or compliance triggers.
- Bias, fairness, tone, brand fit, and audience risk.
- Whether the final work reflects human judgment, not unsupported AI output.
When review should be required
When review should be required
- External-facing communications.
- Client or customer deliverables.
- Board, funder, grant, or regulator materials.
- Work involving employees, finances, health, legal matters, confidential strategy, or eligibility decisions.
How Rule 52 helps
How Rule 52 helps
- Rule 52 generates a human-review checklist matched to the buyer’s workflow, tools, data categories, reviewer, and review cadence. Pro adds risk and inventory records for organizations that need documentation beyond the review step.
Recommended next step
Generate the documents, then review and adopt them.
Rule 52 creates editable business-control materials for AI use. It does not replace legal, cybersecurity, privacy, clinical, tax, or compliance review. Regulated or high-risk organizations should have qualified professionals review before adoption.