Say what is ready for review
A handoff should name the client, period and work completed. 'Books done' is too broad if bank reconciliation remains open or source documents are missing. Describe the work at a level that lets the reviewer choose the next action.
Link the trial balance and relevant working papers to the version being handed over. A reviewer should not need to guess which file contains the latest approved entries.
Bring open questions to the surface
Use a short list of unresolved issues with evidence references, owners and suggested next steps. Prioritise questions that affect reports or the agreed scope. Keep routine document requests visible without obscuring more significant judgement issues.
Separate proposed entries from entries already posted. The reviewer needs to know whether the file contains a suggestion, an approved correction or a change still awaiting supporting evidence.
Close the loop
Record review decisions and communicate them to the preparer. A useful handoff is a two-way process that updates the state of the work, not simply an email announcing completion.
Consistency can begin with a simple shared working-paper format. Software should make that discipline easier to follow; it cannot compensate for unclear responsibilities or missing evidence.
For example, a reviewer may approve a classification change but request further evidence for a supplier balance. Keep those decisions separate so the approved change can proceed while the unresolved balance remains visible.