Editorial Policy

Topic selection

We choose topics that help readers ask clearer, safer, and more useful questions to AI tools. Priority goes to repeatable frameworks, practical examples, verification habits, and workflow guidance.

Writing and editing standards

Articles should answer the reader's core intent quickly, then provide examples, pitfalls, and review criteria. We avoid exaggerated claims, fake expertise, and prompt formulas that imply guaranteed results.

Each guide carries a named public author. Named editors and contributors are responsible for shaping the final article, checking examples, and deciding whether a piece is ready to publish.

AI assistance disclosure

AI tools may assist with research support, outlines, drafting, or structural review. Human authors remain responsible for final wording, source checks, editorial judgment, and corrections.

Source standards

When an article makes factual claims about AI prompting, safety, or tool behavior, it should rely on primary or credible sources where possible. Source links should be checked for relevance, accessibility, and publication context.

Fact-checking approach

Claims about laws, prices, model capabilities, schedules, or current product behavior are verified before publication and updated when they change. Guides distinguish general prompting practices from tool-specific instructions.