Architecture scenarioHard~15 minAgents & Workflows / 10 of 18

Interview question

How would you design human approval for consequential agent actions?

Pauses durable execution with a clear action preview, verifies approver authority, handles expiry and changed state, and resumes idempotently.

1Say itAnswer out loud first

2CompareCompare with Core answer

3RefineRefine with Stronger and Advanced

TL;DR

The agent proposes a fully specified action, and the application pauses before execution. The approval screen shows the target, important arguments, consequence, and supporting context in user-readable form. The application verifies that the approver has authority, records the decision, and executes only the approved action through the normal service boundary.

Full answer below

Practice focus

Human-in-the-loop design, approval integrity, durable pauses, authorization, and race conditions.

Answer first

Answer path

Core answer first, then checkpoints toward a stronger answer.

Start
Core answer
Start here. This is the direct spoken answer to practice first.
Overview
Approval is meaningful only when the person sees the exact action and the system revalidates it before execution.
The agent proposes a fully specified action, and the application pauses before execution. The approval screen shows the target, important arguments, consequence, and supporting context in user-readable form. The application verifies that the approver has authority, records the decision, and executes only the approved action through the normal service boundary.
Checkpoint
Stronger answer
Optional upgrade with examples, trade-offs, and sharper phrasing.
Approval requests have stable IDs, expiry, one-time use, and hashes or versions for material arguments. If the resource, price, recipient, permission, or plan changes, the old approval is invalid and a new preview is required. The paused run is durable so process restarts do not lose the request or execute it twice. Rejection and timeout are explicit workflow outcomes.
Finish
Advanced answer
Optional deeper angle for production judgment and nuance.
I avoid approval fatigue by requiring intervention according to consequence and confidence, not on every harmless read. Separation of duties may require a different approver for high-risk actions. Resume logic rechecks authorization, policy, resource version, budget, and idempotency immediately before execution to prevent time-of-check/time-of-use errors. Audit records connect proposal, displayed preview, approver identity, decision, final arguments, side-effect receipt, and any later compensation.

Review signals

Use these to catch weak phrasing, shallow reasoning, and risky claims.

Common mistakesCandidateCommon mistakesMistakes that weaken the answer or signal shallow understanding.Open details

Details

Asking approval before the action arguments are final.
Allowing approval to survive material state changes.
Using a simple chat reply as the only approval record.

Red flagsCandidateRed flagsSignals that an interviewer may treat as risky.Open details

Details

The model decides who may approve.
A process restart can execute an action twice.
The user cannot see the real target or consequence.

Follow-up prompts

Quick interviewer prompts inside this drill.

Follow-up questionsCandidateFollow-up questionsLikely next questions after the main answer.Open details

Details

Treat these as the next interviewer turn. Answer one out loud, then save the gap in your practice notes.

What invalidates an approval?
How would you resume after a long pause?
When is separation of duties appropriate?

Continue the section

Next in Agents & Workflows: Agent delegation patterns

Step 11 of 18

Compare a manager agent, a handoff, and an agent used as a tool.

Practice route

Read core answer Review checklist Follow-up prompts Track progress

Finished this drill?

Practice freely. Sign in only when you want to save completion, confidence, notes, or bookmarks.

New to Aporeon? Create account

Drill details

Human editorial direction

Aporeon is shaped by Aleksandar Tomovski, a software developer with experience on both sides of technical interviews. Content is reviewed for accuracy, natural spoken delivery, useful depth, and honest trade-offs.

About the creator Editorial standards

Was this drill useful?