Queue & Decision → Next Action

One signal is usually enough. At rollup levels, queue and decision are paired (Automation ↔ NOT_REPORTABLE, Auditor ↔ REPORTABLE, Insufficient Data ↔ MANUAL_REVIEW), so do not branch twice on both for the same if/else.

Signal	Question it answers	Typical fields
Queue	Where should this work go next?	`routing.queue`, `search_queue`, `case_queue`, `court_queue`
Decision	What is the reportability outcome?	`charge_decision`, `record_decision`, `case_decision`, `court_decision`

Pattern	When…
Queue only	You route work to desks / queues (automation vs auditor vs data review)
Decision only	You key off reportability labels (clear / consider / manual review)
Both	Only when they do different jobs — e.g. queue for routing, decision for report/UI labeling. Not two copies of the same branch.

Level	Queue field	Decision field
Per charge	`routing.queue`	`charge_decision`
Whole search	`search_queue`	`record_decision`
Case / court	`case_queue` / `court_queue`	`case_decision` / `court_decision`

How queues are assigned and rolled up: Routing & Queues.

Queue → recommended action

Use when you consume queue (alone or with decision).

Queue	Meaning	Recommended customer action
Automation	No human review needed	Auto-complete in your CRA workflow. Typically clear / exclude not-reportable charges; do not open an auditor queue.
Auditor	Human review recommended	Route to a human auditor before including the search (or charge) in a consumer report. Use `rationale`, `cited_rules`, and `citations` as the audit packet.
Insufficient Data	Human review required — data too sparse for automation	Do not auto-report. Inspect `validation.issues` (when present). Fix source data and resubmit with `record_json`, or send to a human data-review queue if you cannot correct the payload.

Rollup priority: Insufficient Data > Auditor > Automation. One charge in Insufficient Data escalates the case, court, and search.

Decision → recommended action

Use when you consume decision (alone or with queue). At aggregated levels (record_decision, court_decision, case_decision), decision mirrors queue:

Decision	Paired queue (rollup)	Recommended customer action
NOT_REPORTABLE	`Automation`	Treat as cleared for automation — typically exclude from the consumer report.
REPORTABLE	`Auditor`	Eligible to report — route through your audit / disclosure process before publishing.
MANUAL_REVIEW	`Insufficient Data`	Do not auto-complete. Investigate data (or resubmit) before finishing.

Per-charge charge_decision works the same way for offense-level reportability. Note: identity match can change queue relative to a naive decision-only rule — if your workflow is desk/routing based, prefer the queue tables instead.

Using rationale, cited_rules, and citations

These live on each offense under decision.court_decisions[].case_decisions[].offenses[]:

Field	What it is	How to use it
`rationale`	Human-readable explanation of the charge outcome	Show to auditors; log for disputes / QC
`cited_rules`	Internal rule IDs that fired (e.g. `GENERAL_TRAFFIC_NON_REPORT`)	Traceability, regression tests, support tickets
`citations`	Legal statute references when the engine provides them (may be `[]`)	Attach to audit notes when present; do not invent statutes if empty

For Auditor / REPORTABLE paths, treat these three fields as the default audit packet alongside identity match (id_match) and routing detail. For Automation / NOT_REPORTABLE, you usually do not need a human to read them — still persist them for audit trails. For Insufficient Data / MANUAL_REVIEW, prefer validation.issues for what is missing; use rationale for the narrative why automation stopped.

Resubmit vs human review

Situation	Prefer
Missing / wrong mapped fields you can fix (disposition, charge text, DOB, SSN, address)	Resubmit with corrected `record_json` + `submission_type: "resubmit"`
Vendor XML was incomplete and you have corrected mapped criminal JSON	Resubmit (`record_json` only — no `xml`)
Data cannot be fixed in your system (court record genuinely sparse, need researcher)	Human review / data acquisition — do not loop empty resubmits
Queue is `Auditor` or decision is `REPORTABLE`, and data looks complete	Human audit of reportability — usually not a resubmit
Queue is `Automation` or decision is `NOT_REPORTABLE`	No resubmit; complete automatically

Resubmission is optional. Most integrations send one evaluate and stop. Details: Resubmission Workflow.

Core Concepts

Guides

Examples

Support

Queue & Decision → Next Action

Queue → recommended action

Decision → recommended action

Using rationale, cited_rules, and citations

Resubmit vs human review

​Queue → recommended action

​Decision → recommended action

​Using rationale, cited_rules, and citations

​Resubmit vs human review

​Related

Queue → recommended action

Decision → recommended action

Using rationale, cited_rules, and citations

Resubmit vs human review

Related