AI writing review for responsible teams
Build a clear workflow for reviewing AI-writing signals across people and projects. The right workflow starts with policy, privacy, and human accountability.
Start with the decisions your team needs to make
Define the purpose
Be specific about what the check is for: editorial review, quality assurance, or a learning conversation. Do not use a detector score as proof of authorship or misconduct.
Set a consistent review path
Decide who can run a check, who can view a result, when a writer is contacted, and how a final decision is documented. Consistency matters more than a dramatic threshold.
Review data before it leaves your system
Do not submit confidential, personal, or regulated information without first reviewing the privacy policy, your data obligations, and whether an external detection service is appropriate.
A practical operating model
Begin with a small, well-defined use case. Write down which documents are in scope, what an allowed use of AI looks like, and what happens after a result. Test the process with the people who will be affected before expanding it.
Train reviewers to recognize the limits of detection. A result can point to a passage that needs context. It cannot confirm a person’s intent, validate a fact, or determine an outcome on its own.
Fit the tool around your policy
Where a team needs a repeatable check, the workflow should leave room for a reviewer to see the source material, record context, and explain the decision to the person affected.
Before automating anything, ask what data is shared, who has access, how long records are kept, and what an appeal or correction process looks like. Those decisions are as important as the technical connection.
Start with the API details
Review the available API documentation, authentication model, limits, and data flow before planning an integration. For sensitive or high-impact uses, contact the team to discuss the proposed workflow first.
Enterprise FAQ
Can we submit confidential material?
Do not submit confidential, personal, or regulated material without first reviewing the privacy policy and your organization’s data requirements. Submitted text is sent to a detection service for analysis. Contact the team before designing a sensitive workflow.
Can a detector score be used to make a final decision?
No. A score is a statistical signal, not proof of authorship, skill, or intent. Use it to prompt a review that includes the document, source material, relevant policies, and a qualified human decision-maker.
What should a written policy cover?
State the purpose of the review, which documents are in scope, permitted uses of AI, who can see results, what follow-up looks like, and how someone can challenge or clarify a finding.
Where can we find API information?
Start with the API documentation for available endpoints and authentication. Contact the team with your intended volume, data-flow questions, and any compliance review requirements.
Plan a responsible team workflow
Tell us what you want to review, who will use the result, and what data requirements your organization must meet.
Contact Sales Team