This question already has an answer here:
I was testing something out with suggested edits so I went into the review queue and picked the first edit. After reading it, I planned on rejecting it because it seemed to drastically change the post. But in my experiment I wanted to click on "Improve"...so I did. Of course it turned out to be an audit! So I failed for clicking "Improve" instead of "Reject", which I ultimately planned on doing after cancelling out of it because I really didn't plan on improving it.
This isn't a huge deal because I don't think I fail too many audits. So my question is, should you not actually fail when clicking "Improve" until you click to save the edit. That way, there is still the chance to cancel out of it and skip or reject? This might be minor and not worth the trouble but I thought it was interesting that I came across it. I don't expect this happens too often but it seems like an easy change.
Now I just experienced an audit where I rejected the edit but still had to say why before it said I passed. This still seems minor but inconsistent with my last audit experience. If it is going to fail for clicking "Improve" but not allowing the action to be finished (by cancelling which should result in a pass or by submitting the improvement) then shouldn't it also pass as soon as the reject button is clicked?