All packs

Kit · 30 pages · 11 prompts + house style

Catch what your AI made up

An AI draft that's wrong doesn't read wrong. Check it against the truth instead of reading it again.

After using this: You'll be able to tell a draft that reads well from one that's actually true, and you'll have a check that still works on the 40th article.

Who this is for

You're the last person between an AI-written draft and a customer. The writing sounds fine, which is exactly the problem.

Not for you if

You want a better draft to begin with. That's Write help articles humans and AI can use. This one picks up after the draft exists.

$89

One-time purchase · HTML and PDF

License

Instant delivery after payment.

How it works

A bad AI draft doesn't read badly. When an AI doesn't know something, it writes the most plausible sentence, in the same confident voice as the rest, so reading it again can't catch it. This kit replaces reading with checking: turn the draft into a list of claims, check each one against a source, check the checker's quotes, and learn the 7 shapes a made-up line takes.

What's inside

  1. 01Why a bad draft doesn't read badly, and what changes in how you review
  2. 02The 7 things AI drafts get wrong, each traced to one of 3 reasons
  3. 03Check it against something, don't read it through: pulling out the claims and checking each one
  4. 04The review that still works on the 40th article
  5. 05When to reject instead of fixing
  6. 0611 prompts, from turning a draft into a list of claims to turning a rejection into a better prompt
  7. 07Telling whether it worked
  8. 08Your review rules, as a setup prompt for your AI
  9. 09The short version: the rules and the prompts on one page

See the pages

3 pages from the PDF you download, as they are. Select one for a closer look.

Preview a prompt from the pack

The full prompt, exactly as it appears in the pack. Nothing removed.

Check a documentation draft against a source of truth. Report differences only. Do not use anything you know about products like this one. The draft: [paste in full] The claim list from prompt 1: [paste] The source: [paste or attach whatever you have: screenshots of the actual screens, a spec, a ticket, engineer's notes, an existing page you trust, release notes] What the source is: [say which of those it is, and how current] A claim is anything that could turn out to be true or false: a step, an on-screen name, a number, a limit, a permission, how the product behaves, a prerequisite or a consequence. For every claim in the draft, give one of 3 verdicts: VERIFIED - the source confirms it. Quote the line in the source that does, word for word. CONTRADICTED - the source says something different. Quote both, and give the correction from the source. UNVERIFIABLE - the source does not cover it. This is not a pass. If the source confirms only part of a claim, split it, and give each part its own verdict. Then, separately, go the other way: MISSING - anything important in the source that the draft leaves out. Quote it. This is the category reading never finds, because there is nothing on the page to read. Rules that matter more than the output format: - Use only the source I gave you. If your own knowledge suggests a claim is true, that is not verification, and saying so would defeat the point of this exercise. - Do not resolve a conflict by picking whichever sounds more likely. Report it. - If the source is ambiguous about something, say so rather than deciding. Finish with: the count in each category, the proportion of claims that are unverifiable, and whether the contradictions cluster in particular sections.

The thinking behind it

Want the thinking behind this kit? The course Writing the article covers it in short parts, with an exercise in each.

Questions

Catch what your AI made up, $89

Instant delivery after payment.