Different changes call for different verification
Wording edits and permission changes carry different risks. Important changes need separate verification; minor changes should proceed quickly.
Marblo assigns risk-based independent testers according to a change’s importance. During the hypemarc.com improvements, security path changes followed a different verification path from wording and blog changes.
A separate AI verifies important changes, including counterexamples
For important changes involving payments, permissions, or deployment, a separate AI tester is automatically assigned to verify the work, including counterexamples. Minor changes pass quickly.
A separate AI checks the implementer’s work, examining counterexamples alongside expected behavior for important changes.
In practice: independent security handoffs and orchestrator blog reviews
During the hypemarc.com improvements, security path changes automatically went to an independent tester to check the worker’s result. Standard wording and blog changes passed through orchestrator review without a tester.
The orchestrator returned a build note PR containing private links and empty feature descriptions, and the content was corrected. This review checked the evidence and explanations intended for publication.
| Change in the hypemarc.com work | Process it actually followed |
|---|---|
| Security path changes | Automatic handoff to an independent tester |
| Standard wording and blog changes | Passed through orchestrator review without a tester |
| Build note PR with private links and empty feature descriptions | Returned by the orchestrator for corrections, then revised |
Why it helps: verification roles follow the risk
Important changes receive verification separate from implementation. Teams can track those two steps while keeping minor changes moving quickly.
Orchestrator review also checked wording and blog content, returning the PR with incomplete explanations and private links for corrections. The example shows both verification paths in use.
When to use it
- When important payment, permission, or deployment changes need independent verification
- When you want a separate AI to examine counterexamples to the implementing AI's work
- When standard wording and blog changes are also progressing and you need to follow each verification path
Evaluate the verification paths: which changes went to an independent tester, and which went through orchestrator review?
In this series
- Marblo Build Notes 1 — The Closed Loop Release
- Marblo Build Notes 2 — Completing a Mission with the Closed Loop
- Marblo Build Notes 3 — Agent Mosaic
- Marblo Build Notes 4 — Orchebrain
- Marblo Build Notes 5 — Web Tabs
- Marblo Build Notes 6 — Merge Train
- Marblo Build Notes 7 — Multiple AI Accounts
- Marblo Build Notes 8 — Risk-Based Independent Testers
- Marblo Build Notes 9 — Telegram Conversations with the Orchestrator