Review an AI change using the controls for the item being changed. Skybits supports several kinds of work, and they do not all use the same approval model.
This matters when one task creates a written memo, a forecast spreadsheet, and a visual canvas. The memo's suggestions do not mean the spreadsheet values or canvas source are also waiting in a suggestion queue.
Rich-text documents use suggestions
The current Guide says agent changes to rich-text content arrive as suggestions. You can inspect, accept, or reject them in the editor.
Ask for a narrow edit when practical: replace one paragraph, revise one assumption, or add one sourced section. A change small enough to understand is easier to review than a complete rewrite.
Read for meaning as well as wording. A suggestion can subtly alter an obligation, remove a qualification, change a deadline, or turn an estimate into a fact. Acceptance should mean that a person understands the revised statement.
Spreadsheets change live and receive review markers
Agent spreadsheet edits update the live workbook. The current Guide describes changed-cell markers and an Unreviewed changes panel for human editors.
Inspect formulas and structure along with displayed values. A reasonable-looking total may result from an incomplete range, a wrong reference, or a value that replaced a formula. For a forecast, compare the changed assumptions with the source, then trace their effect on the totals.
Agents cannot list, accept, or reject spreadsheet review entries through the documented tool surface. Human editors can reject supported individual changes or accept the current set as reviewed. That is a useful separation of responsibilities, but it is not a guarantee that changes cannot affect the live workbook before review.
Canvases need source and output review
Canvas edits are saved as collaborative source-file changes. Review the source diff or baseline comparison and inspect the preview.
A canvas can look correct while containing a problematic network destination or incorrect underlying value. Conversely, a plausible source change may break the rendered page. Check both.
Keep JavaScript off while inspecting unfamiliar changes. The Guide describes static preview defaults and scripts switching off again after edits. A script-enabled canvas deserves a code review appropriate to its behavior.
Files use versions
An uploaded File receives a new immutable version immediately. Review the Versions surface, download the relevant versions when appropriate, or restore a previous version as a new one.
This workflow is useful for preserving earlier material. It does not provide inline review of every byte or prove that a file is safe to execute. Use normal file-handling precautions for archives, scripts, and unfamiliar formats.
Decide what a reviewer is responsible for
For each task, name the sources, the changes expected, and the decision the reviewer must make. A person reviewing a board memo should know whether to check factual claims, confidentiality, links, figures, or all of them.
Keep the review scope small. If an agent changes several item types at once, review them as separate artifacts before distributing the combined result.
| Item | Reviewer should check |
|---|---|
| Memo | Meaning, qualifications, evidence, audience |
| Forecast | Changed assumptions, formulas, references, structure |
| Canvas | Source, external resources, rendered output, scripts |
| File | Correct version, contents, format, safe handling |
History provides another way to inspect and recover prior states. Before restoring a whole item, check whether collaborators have made useful changes since the revision you want.
Next step: Give the agent one small edit, then verify that you understand how that edit appears in the item's review surface. See Skybits Help.