Version 1.0 · Effective January 2024
Core Editorial Principles
01
Independence
Editorial decisions are made entirely on the basis of reader value and accuracy. No commercial relationship influences what we publish, how we rank tools, or what conclusions we reach.
02
Accuracy
All factual claims must be verifiable. Benchmark scores, pricing information, and capability claims are checked against primary sources before publication.
03
Transparency
We disclose our methodology, testing conditions, and any limitations in our review process. We acknowledge uncertainty rather than fabricating false confidence.
04
Fairness
Every tool is evaluated against its stated purpose and target audience. We do not penalise specialised tools for failing at tasks they were never designed for.
05
Currency
AI tools change rapidly. We commit to updating reviews when major changes occur and clearly marking the version and date of testing in every review.
06
Accountability
We correct errors promptly, acknowledge mistakes publicly when significant, and provide a clear process for readers to submit correction requests.
Conflicts of Interest Policy
AIToolsRecap operates a strict conflicts of interest policy for all contributors and editorial staff.
Employment & Financial Interests
No contributor may review a tool if they are currently employed by, have a financial stake in, or have received any compensation from the tool's developer within the past 12 months.
No Affiliate Relationships
AIToolsRecap does not maintain affiliate relationships with any AI tool vendor. We receive no commission or referral fee when readers click through to a tool's website.
Gifted Access & Free Trials
Where a contributor uses complimentary or trial access for testing, this is disclosed in the review. Gifted access does not obligate positive coverage in any way.
Sponsored Content
AIToolsRecap does not publish sponsored reviews or paid content of any kind. All content on this site reflects the genuine views of the author, uninfluenced by commercial relationships.
Corrections Policy
Accuracy is central to our mission. We take correction requests seriously and process them as follows:
- Minor factual errors (pricing, version numbers, feature details): corrected within 5 business days with a note appended to the review.
- Significant factual errors (benchmark scores, core capability claims): corrected within 10 business days. If the error materially affects the overall score, the review is re-evaluated.
- Score disputes: We will review the scoring methodology and published evidence. Score changes require editorial approval and are accompanied by a published explanation.
To submit a correction request, please contact us with the specific claim, the correct information, and your evidence.
AI-Generated Content Policy
AIToolsRecap requires that all reviews are substantially written by the credited human author based on their genuine first-hand experience. The use of AI writing tools to generate review content is prohibited.
Contributors may use AI tools for tasks such as grammar checking, formatting, or research assistance, but the substantive analysis, conclusions, and scoring must reflect the human author's independent judgement.
Reviews suspected of being primarily AI-generated will be removed pending investigation. Repeat violations result in permanent contributor suspension.
Vendor Relations Policy
We do not share review drafts with vendors prior to publication. We do not offer vendors the right of reply within reviews, though we will correct factual errors they identify through our corrections process.
Vendors may contact us to flag factual inaccuracies through the standard corrections process. We do not accept requests to remove or suppress published reviews.
Questions & Feedback
Questions about these editorial standards, or concerns about whether a specific piece of content meets them, can be directed to our editorial team at contact form or via the contact form.