Predicted loss of function (pLoF) variants are highly deleterious and play an important role in disease biology, but many of these variants may not actually result in loss-of-function. Here we present a framework that advances interpretation of pLoF variants in research and clinical settings by considering three categories of LoF evasion: (1) predicted rescue by secondary sequence properties, (2) uncertain biological relevance, and (3) potential technical artifacts. We also provide recommendations on adjustments to ACMG/AMP guidelines's PVS1 criterion. Applying this framework to all high-confidence pLoF variants in 22 autosomal recessive disease-genes from the Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD, v2.1.1) revealed predicted LoF evasion or potential artifacts in 27.3% (304/1,113) of variants. The major reasons were location in the last exon, in a homopolymer repeat, in low per-base expression (pext) score regions, or the presence of cryptic splice rescues. Variants predicted to be potential artifacts or to evade LoF were enriched for ClinVar benign variants. PVS1 was downgraded in 99.4% (162/163) of LoF evading variants assessed, with 17.2% (28/163) downgraded as a result of our framework, adding to previous guidelines. Variant pathogenicity was affected (mostly from likely pathogenic to VUS) in 20 (71.4%) of these 28 variants. This framework guides assessment of pLoF variants beyond standard annotation pipelines, and substantially reduces false positive rates, which is key to ensure accurate LoF variant prediction in both a research and clinical setting.