Fit the professional's actual workflow

Domain experts have established workflows and artifacts, and an agent that ignores them feels foreign. Meet them where they are:

• Produce the artifacts they use. Lawyers live in tracked changes; an agent that proposes redlines they can accept or reject one by one fits their process, while one that silently rewrites a contract is useless to them. Clinicians, accountants, and analysts each have their own native formats and review rituals: produce those.
• Propose, don't impose. For consequential changes, the agent proposes and the human commits (the accept/reject pattern). This keeps the professional in control and accountable, which is both a trust and a liability requirement.
• Encode domain conventions. Formatting, numbering, terminology, and structure that the domain expects should be applied deterministically (Chapter 3), and the prompt should encode the consequences of actions in domain terms (Chapter 6), e.g. "renumber and update every cross-reference when you change a numbered clause." This embedded expertise is what separates a credible tool from a generic one.