Reflection and critic patterns

Overview

• Reflection revises an output after examining it.
• A critic is a separate checking role that evaluates an output against criteria.
• Either can be model-based, rule-based, or a combination.

Why this matters

A first draft may omit evidence, misunderstand instructions, or fail formatting and completeness requirements.

An everyday example

An editor reviews a draft and sends specific corrections to the writer.

A technical example

Check that every policy claim has a valid source ID, then allow one rewrite for missing support.

How it works

1. Produce draft
2. Run explicit checks
3. Classify failures
4. Revise once if recoverable
5. Recheck
6. Accept or escalate.

Architecture and flow

Draft → critic/rules → bounded revision → final validation.

The insurance assistant example

A critic flags an answer that claims coverage while citing only a document checklist.

When to use it

Drafting and grounded explanations where evaluators detect common recoverable errors.

When to avoid it

Do not use repeated self-review as an authorization or correctness guarantee.

Interview answer

“Reflection can improve drafts, but I define measurable checks and limit revision loops because critics can share the original model's biases.”

Benefits, trade-offs, and production considerations

Extra calls raise cost and latency. Compare one stronger generation call against generation plus critique; enforce deterministic checks first.