Use a second teammate to improve a result
A team review works best when the author and reviewer have distinct responsibilities and share the same source material.
Define the review
Create a group with the relevant teammates. Identify the draft, the source material, and the criteria the review should use.
Sam, prepare a one-page proposal from the attached brief. Riley, review it for unsupported claims, missing requirements, and unclear decisions. Sam, revise it once using Riley's findings. Return one final proposal and a short list of unresolved questions.
Keep the handoff concrete
Ask the author to save the draft in shared files and give the reviewer the path. The reviewer should identify specific passages and the evidence behind each finding.
Keep one teammate responsible for editing the final file. That makes it easier to tell which version you should review.
Close the loop
Open the final document and compare the important changes with the review findings. Ask which findings were resolved, which were rejected with a reason, and which still need your decision.
A second AI opinion is another review pass. For a result that depends on real behavior, also inspect the relevant output, source, or executed check.
Save the review method as a skill once its criteria are useful across tasks.