What do we look for in reviewing professional work?
The steps taken to perform the work, the decisions taken and the data and assumptions that informed them. I was always told that "peer review ready" documentation meant that a competent colleague should be able to reproduce the work.
This turns out to be a side-benefit of using encoded expertise with agents. It's easy to visually inspect the path the agent took through a workflow, and click on any step to see input/output, agent notes, etc.
Not only can you reproduce the entire work by just telling an agent "run expertise X523", you also get a nice tour of the journey which you can use to improve the expertise itself.