Rudder is designed for Agents that improve through real work. That does not mean every comment silently rewrites an Agent.

​
Three different steps

StepQuestion it answers
ReviewIs this result good enough for the task?
FeedbackWhat was good, wrong, missing, or worth repeating?
ImprovementShould this lesson change future context, instructions, a Skill, a workflow, or an evaluation?
An Approval is different. It gives permission for an action, such as spending money or making a sensitive change. It does not judge the quality of the result.

​
Example: improve future release notes

A writing Agent submits release notes. The reviewer accepts the setup steps but asks for a clearer limitations section. After the revision is accepted, the team notices the same check has helped several releases. Instead of copying the comment forever, the team proposes an update to the release-writing Skill, tests it, and uses the reviewed version in later work. That is how feedback can improve the team without turning one opinion into an uncontrolled permanent rule.

​
When to use each step

  • Add a reviewer when completion needs independent judgment.
  • Leave specific feedback whenever the next person or future Run needs to know why a decision was made.
  • Change durable instructions only when the lesson is repeated, its scope is clear, and you can evaluate the change.

​
Safe improvement

When an Issue has a named reviewer, the assignee cannot skip that review and close the task as accepted. A casual “looks good” comment is useful feedback, but it is not the same as recording the review decision. Feedback never changes an Agent, Skill, or workflow by itself. A durable change should name the supporting work, where it applies, who reviews it, and how to test or undo it. Follow Review Agent work for the practical steps.