Reviewing and validating output

A coding agent will tell you it is done. That is a claim, not a guarantee: the most common failure mode is output that looks complete but is partly stubbed or subtly wrong. Reviewing before acceptance is what makes the workflow safe.

What to check before you accept

The actual files, rather than the agent's summary, are what reveal problems. Common ones to watch for:

• Placeholders dressed up as logic — a Log Message or TODO standing in for real work. It looks finished but does nothing.
• The wrong activity for the job — Invoke Code or a generic fallback where a native UiPath activity exists.
• Logic in the wrong place — real work crammed into Assign expressions, or everything in one file.
• Package issues — dependencies unpinned in project.json, the wrong package, or a missing one.
• Broken or deleted selectors — UI targets removed from the Object Repository rather than repaired.
• Stability across the project — a fix in one workflow can quietly break another, so the whole project is worth validating, not just the file that changed.
• Logging and error handling — actually present, or only mentioned.

When something is off, returning it for regeneration is faster in practice than cleaning it up by hand.

Validating with UiPath's own tools

A visual read alone is not enough. The dependable check is the agent running the Workflow Analyzer (Analyze Project) and the build, resolving every error and warning, and confirming a local run before the work is accepted. The Workflow Analyzer catches rule and style issues a quick glance misses, and a clean build catches problems that validation alone does not.

Using the agent as a reviewer

Reviewing is an under-used capability, and one the agent does well. It is good at spotting:

• security issues
• incomplete logic
• wrong outputs
• problems in unfamiliar technology

A specific request, paired with an instruction not to change anything, gets the most out of it:

"Review GetInvoices.xaml for security issues, incomplete error handling, and incorrect activity choices. List the findings with severity. Do not fix anything."

A specific request produces a specific review, while a generic "review this" produces a generic one. For a repeatable, read-only review across a whole project, the agent has a dedicated review capability for exactly this. See the Skills catalog.