How we review and compare AI tools
AI Tools Ratings publishes product profiles, comparisons and selection guides. This page explains the evidence behind those pages and the limits of our current coverage. Updated October 19, 2026.
Who publishes the content?
The publisher is AI Tools Ratings. Research and drafting can use AI assistance. We do not invent individual reviewers, credentials, customer interviews or first-hand experience. A publisher byline identifies the responsible site; it does not imply an external expert has certified a product.
Four kinds of information
- Observed public information: a visible field limit, accessible feature or price shown on a dated public page. This does not establish logged-in entitlements.
- Vendor statement: a capability, privacy promise, benchmark or rollout described by the provider. Attribution is not independent validation.
- External research: a study with its own date, sample set and tested versions. Older findings do not automatically rank a newer release.
- Our analysis: selection advice, evaluation procedures and explicitly hypothetical calculations. These are not observed product results.
When can we call something a test?
A hands-on result needs the product route, date, plan, relevant settings, defined task and a record of the outcome. A comparison needs consistent conditions and a disclosed selection method. If we have only read official pages, we call the work a source review. We do not generate an accuracy score from marketing copy.
The October detector guides are source reviews. Their worksheets are blank, and their calculators model assumptions supplied by the reader. No original current-version detector benchmark is claimed. The video and agent pilots describe work a reader can perform, rather than experiments already completed by this site.
Pricing and privacy checks
We distinguish an annual monthly equivalent from a month-to-month payment, shared credits from independent allowances, characters from words, and free accounts from subscription trials. When a public price cannot be verified, we link the official route and state the gap. Promotional terms and taxes can change the final charge.
Privacy has several dimensions: storage, training use, sharing, indexing, retention and deletion. A statement about one does not settle the others. We point to product-specific documentation and identify meaningful differences between a short FAQ and a detailed policy. Reading a policy is not a security audit or a contract approval.
Selection, submissions and links
A product submission starts editorial review; it is not a guaranteed recommendation. Vendor-submitted descriptions may be rewritten, and unverified adoption or performance claims may be omitted. Some outbound links may be commercial or affiliate links; a link is not proof that we used the product. Selection advice should be supported by the disclosed task and evidence.
Updates and older pages
A content-updated date records a substantive page revision, not a promise that every feature has been tested that day. Specific facts should carry their own check context. Older imported articles and scorecards remain in the archive and do not all meet this expanded format yet. Their original dates matter. We prioritize revisions where limits, availability or evidence could materially affect a purchase.
Corrections
Use our contact page to report a factual issue. Include the page URL, the disputed claim, a current primary source and the date you observed the difference. Product owners can use the submission form to provide updated public information. A correction request is reviewed on its evidence.
See the approach in practice: free AI detector comparison, Higgsfield usable-cost analysis and Muse product and rollout distinctions.