Arc Skills / Technical management and design reviews
Build a technical review action closure matrix
Use Arc Skills to check whether technical review actions have actually resolved the concern they were raised to address. The closure matrix connects each action to its required outcome, submitted revision, evidence quality and recorded reviewer disposition.
Use this skill
Use Arc Skills to build a technical review action closure matrix.
Inputs:
- Original action IDs, findings and closure criteria
- Submitted evidence with revisions and dates
- Recorded reviewer decisions and dependent actions
Return action, required outcome, evidence, adequacy finding, status, owner and next decision. Separate owner-reported completion from reviewer acceptance. Flag evidence that documents activity without resolving the concern.What you provide and what you get
| What you have | How it is used | What you get |
|---|---|---|
| Review findings and closure criteria | Recover the outcome each action must achieve | An auditable closure denominator |
| Submitted artifacts and exact revisions | Check the concern against evidence | Adequate, incomplete and mismatched submissions |
| Reviewer decisions and dependencies | Preserve actual authority and re-opened effects | A decision-ready closure matrix |
Three actions marked done, only one accepted
Illustrative engineering example.
A review tracker shows all three actions complete. Checking the evidence and decisions reveals different actual positions.
ACT-01: demonstrate connector pinout compatibility; owner attaches meeting minutes only.
ACT-02: close sensor calibration gap; CAL-07 rev B and matching serial number submitted; reviewer acceptance recorded.
ACT-03: correct throughput test; owner submits TEST-09 rev B with 4 messages/s criterion although INT-09 B requires 5.| Action | Required outcome | Submitted evidence | Closure finding | Next action / authority |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACT-01 | Compatible controlled pinouts | Meeting minutes, no pin comparison | Open: discussion does not establish compatibility | Interface owner submits signed pin table; reviewer assesses it |
| ACT-02 | Calibration for installed sensor | CAL-07 B, matching serial, reviewer decision | Accepted by recorded reviewer | Retain evidence and decision locators |
| ACT-03 | Procedure checks current 5 messages/s contract | TEST-09 B checks 4 messages/s | Needs rework: wrong acceptance basis | Verification owner corrects procedure and submits revised packet |
Owner-reported completion is 3/3; supported reviewer acceptance is 1/3. Reporting only the tracker’s “done” field would conceal both the missing compatibility evidence and the wrong test criterion.
A corrected procedure revision may also affect a readiness packet that cites the earlier version. Identify that dependency before closing the action, rather than treating each row as isolated administrative work.
Test the outcome, then check the decision
- Preserve the original concern and project closure criteria.
- Match evidence to the exact outcome, configuration and revision.
- Separate submitted, needs rework and accepted using the meanings in the project tracker.
- Check dependencies and record the authorized reviewer’s disposition, with its evidence locator.
Questions about this task
Does an uploaded file close an action?
Only when the file demonstrates the required outcome and the project’s authorized acceptance is recorded. Uploading minutes or a superseded procedure is not enough.
Sources and further reading
- NASA Systems Engineering Handbook: technical assessment: Background on measures, review evidence and action resolution.
References inspected on 3 October 2026. The worked output is an authored example using the stated inputs.