Prepare a reviewed UI fix brief for a coding agent
Give an agent the observed problem and evidence while keeping execution and acceptance under your control.
A brief is context, not autonomous repair
A coding agent needs more than a complaint that a dialog looks wrong. It needs a defined problem, relevant context, and an outcome someone can test. Retick's export panel includes a control to copy an issue fix brief with review context and evidence links. You choose where to paste it. Retick does not run the agent, modify your repository, or verify the resulting code through this handoff.
Prepare a trusted agent handoff
Check the issue against the media
Inspect the proposed finding and clarify the relevant state. For a clipped dialog action, name the viewport, text conditions, observed overlap, and intended usable layout. Add facts absent from the recording manually. Mark technical explanations as hypotheses unless someone has inspected the application implementation or collected independent evidence that supports them.
Copy the reviewed brief
Use the fix-brief copy control in the export panel for the selected issues. Inspect the copied text before sending it anywhere. The brief can contain comments, transcripts, and evidence links as available for the issues. Check that it describes the approved scope rather than carrying unrelated suggestions into an agent task that implies permission to implement them.
Choose a trusted agent environment
Paste the brief only into tools your organization permits to receive that material. Evidence links grant access to review media; they are not harmless identifiers. Check the destination's data handling, the agent's ability to retrieve media, and the repository permissions you are granting separately. Copying a brief does not authorize every action an external agent might propose.
Review implementation and acceptance
Ask the agent to inspect the relevant code, propose a bounded change, and run appropriate checks in its own environment. Review the diff and test results yourself. Reopen the updated application and repeat the reported conditions before declaring the issue resolved. The brief is context for a task, not a promise of correct code, automatic pull requests, or independently verified repair.
Evidence without surrendering acceptance
A grounded task
Give the agent a visible problem and intended result instead of asking it to guess the implementation requirement from a vague visual complaint.
Explicit tool choice
Control which external tool receives the review context without claiming a built-in connection to every coding-agent provider.
Human acceptance
Keep repository permissions, review, testing, and the decision that a fix is complete with the people responsible for the product.
Agent brief questions
Does Retick run the coding agent?▼
No. This workflow copies a brief that you paste into a trusted tool. Execution and repository access are configured separately.
Can every agent inspect the media?▼
Do not assume so. Check the receiving tool's retrieval capabilities and access policy, and inspect what it actually reviewed.
Does the brief guarantee a working fix?▼
No. Review the code, run relevant tests, and verify the changed interface directly before accepting a repair.
Give a coding agent a clearer UI task
Check the issue and evidence before copying the brief.