Editorial policy

We distinguish binding law from guidance, from technical specifications, and from our own workflow recommendations. Dates and status-sensitive claims carry a visible review date. We do not publish invented testimonials, ratings, partner logos, user counts, accuracy percentages or claims of official endorsement.

Commercial considerations may influence which tools we build, but they never change the source hierarchy or the scoring rules. Paying customers do not receive a more favourable clarity indicator: the same text, settings and method version always produce the same result, whether or not a licence is active.

Findings state a reason, a neutral edit instruction and, where relevant, a false-positive note. No finding is presented as a correction of technical fact. Safety content is flagged for review, never labelled unsafe and never automatically rewritten.

Generated drafts may be used during production, but a human approves the published source mapping, the rule definitions and any material correction. Corrections are recorded on the shared corrections page and, when they affect scoring, in the changelog.