Review workflow, protection and Action Plan

Review decisions

Pro adds a lightweight queue for the records that need administrator attention. A candidate can be:

• Unreviewed — no decision recorded yet.
• Reviewing — someone is checking the evidence or consulting the owner.
• Keep access — retain access based on the organisation’s decision.
• Candidate for removal — include the record in follow-up work outside License Radar.
• Protected — keep the record out of the normal recommendation flow.

Add an optional note when it helps explain the decision. License Radar stores the decision, timestamp and associated scan in its installation-scoped storage; it does not write the decision back to Jira.

Protection rules

Protection rules are for known exceptions such as administrators, service accounts or manually approved access. Use only information your Jira site exposes and your organisation can justify. If a group is used as a rule, the product can show that the user matched the configured group information; it does not claim that the group caused a particular product assignment.

Review protection rules regularly. A protected record is not proof that the access is permanently required.

Build an Action Plan

The Action Plan summarises decisions from the selected completed scan:

• Candidates reviewed.
• Candidate for removal.
• Keep access.
• Protected.
• Estimated annual cost associated with the selected follow-up candidates.

The Action Plan and CSV are planning outputs. They do not remove access or claim that a saving has occurred. Confirm the result with the appropriate owner and make any approved change through your existing Jira or procurement process.

Renewal Review

Set a renewal date to keep the next review visible. Renewal Review shows candidates, strong candidates, reviewed records and pending records together with the estimated opportunity. It is a reminder to return to the analysis before renewal, not a billing forecast.

After a later completed scan, History and Verify compares records that are no longer detected and the remaining estimated opportunity. The comparison describes modelled change; it does not prove an invoice saving.