Zum Hauptinhalt springen

Human Interaction

Use this page when you need to understand where human approval, escalation, or override is still mandatory in Helpifyr workflows.

When to use this page​

  • You are designing a workflow with human review.
  • You need to distinguish ordinary approval from break-glass intervention.
  • You need public-safe guidance for escalation behavior.
  • You need to understand where implementation, approval, and final closeout separate.

Prerequisites​

Architecture / Flow​

Step-by-step procedure​

1. Distinguish the interaction type​

  • approval:
    • normal review gate for a bounded step
  • escalation:
    • raise to a different owner or authority
  • override:
    • controlled exception to a normal rule
  • break-glass:
    • exceptional path for urgent recovery, still evidence-bound

2. Base the decision on readback​

Illustrative reads:

GET /api/v1/signoff/readiness
GET /api/v1/security/readiness
GET /api/v1/recovery/readiness

3. Keep authority and scope explicit​

Human review should answer:

  • who may approve this action
  • what exact state was reviewed
  • what action is allowed next

4. Re-verify after the human step​

Even when approval was valid, the workflow is not complete until the resulting state is read back.

Verification​

This page is being applied correctly when:

  1. the interaction type is explicit
  2. approval is tied to current evidence
  3. break-glass remains exceptional rather than normal

Common failure modes​

Using human judgment to replace missing evidence​

Problem:

  • the workflow becomes arbitrary.

Better path:

  • escalate or block when evidence is insufficient

Treating break-glass as a normal operator shortcut​

Problem:

  • safety posture erodes over time.

Better path:

  • keep break-glass separate, auditable, and rare

Source Truth​

Next paths​