Add verification checkpoints at every coupling point where one process consumes another's output unreviewed — break cascade chains
Insert independent verification checkpoints at every coupling point where one process automatically consumes another's output without review to interrupt error cascade chains before they amplify.
Why This Is a Rule
Error cascades occur when one process's output feeds directly into another process without verification. If Process A produces a slightly wrong output and Process B consumes it as input, Process B amplifies the error. Process C consumes B's amplified-error output and amplifies further. By the time the error is detected at Process D, the original small error in A has cascaded into a large, hard-to-trace problem across the entire chain.
Coupling points — where output flows automatically from one process to the next — are where cascades begin. They're the joints in the pipeline where a small error in one stage becomes a compounding error across all subsequent stages. A verification checkpoint at each coupling point interrupts this cascade: it catches errors from the upstream process before they propagate downstream.
This is the systems architecture equivalent of circuit breakers in electrical systems: they interrupt the cascade before it reaches components that can't handle the amplified error. Without verification at coupling points, your process pipeline has no circuit breakers — any upstream error propagates unimpeded to the final output.
When This Fires
- When mapping multi-step processes to identify error propagation risk
- When an error in the final output is difficult to trace back to its source — the pipeline lacks intermediate verification
- When designing new multi-step workflows or automations
- Complements Place pre-flight checks at the prep/execution boundary — catch errors after setup but before propagation starts (pre-flight positioning) with the specific criterion for where to place verifications within a pipeline
Common Failure Mode
Trusting upstream processes because they "usually work": "Step 2 always gets correct input from Step 1, so we don't check." This trust is justified until the day Step 1 produces an anomalous output — and then every downstream step amplifies the anomaly because no verification caught it. The coupling point verification is insurance: rarely needed, but when needed, it prevents cascade amplification that's far more expensive than the verification cost.
The Protocol
(1) Map your multi-step process as a pipeline: what's the output of each step, and what consumes that output? (2) Identify coupling points: where does one step's output feed directly into the next step without any verification? These are your cascade risk points. (3) At each coupling point, insert a verification: does the output from the upstream step meet the input requirements of the downstream step? (4) The verification should be independent — not performed by the same process that produced the output (same-process verification has confirmation bias). (5) The verification doesn't need to be exhaustive — a quick sanity check that catches the most common upstream errors is sufficient. The goal is cascade interruption, not perfection at each checkpoint.