01
Review and QA
How to Build a Review and QA Workflow
This guide turns quality from informal comments into a repeatable path with review gates, issue types, rework routing, and delivery readiness.
8 minreviewQAissue tracking
Define review gates before scale increases
Teams usually feel quality pain only after output volume rises. Review gates should exist before the team depends on speed.
Separate annotation completion from review approval.
Decide who can approve, reject, or escalate.
Use one visible state model for pending, approved, and rework tasks.
Turn issues into reusable quality signals
If all review feedback stays in comments, the team cannot learn which mistake types keep returning.
Split missed labels, wrong class, boundary, and formatting issues.
Use severity or risk level where it changes release decisions.
Keep issue labels consistent so QA summaries stay useful.
Route rework back with clear ownership
Quality improves when rejected work returns with scope, reason, and owner, not just a generic “fix this” message.
02
Route the work back to the responsible member or queue.
03
Review the returned submission again before version freeze or release.
04
Expose blocker and QA status in project and delivery views.
FAQ
Is QA the same as review? Not exactly. Review is the action, QA is the operating system around rules, issue patterns, rework, and release readiness.
Should every reject create an issue? For team-scale delivery, yes. Otherwise the rework path and later QA summary become hard to trust.
Suggestions pour la suite de l’apprentissage
Si vous débutez, commencez par les guides annotation et export.
Si vous préparez des workflows d’équipe, passez ensuite aux guides collaboration et choix de plan.
Si vous voulez voir le workflow complet, poursuivez avec OpenClaw puis les guides d’entraînement.
Étape suivante
Passer du contenu à l’action produit
Si ce guide a déjà résolu votre question actuelle, utilisez les points d’entrée ci-dessous pour continuer la tâche réelle.