SEO Article API
A search-oriented article should first be an answer worth finding.
Explore this guide ↗✅ Editorial quality · Topic field guide
Article API AI Review
AI-assisted review can help find weak explanations, missing context, inconsistent terminology, and unsupported assertions. Its role should be to surface questions for an editor, not to certify its own draft as true.
Start with the right boundary
Separate structural checks from editorial judgment. A validator can identify a missing heading or invalid field; a reviewer must still decide whether the article answers the reader’s question and accurately reflects its evidence.
A practical workflow
01. Define review dimensions
Check factual support, scope, clarity, source quality, originality, and formatting as separate questions. Avoid a single opaque approval score.
02. Make findings actionable
Ask for a location, a description of the issue, and the evidence needed to resolve it. A vague “improve quality” note is not a usable review.
03. Require accountable approval
Record which issues were resolved, which remain, and who accepted the final revision. Keep publication permissions out of the reviewing task.
Before the next handoff
- Every finding points to a specific passage.
- Unresolved evidence gaps remain visible.
- The release decision is independent of the draft.
KEEP THIS IN MIND
Do not let instructions embedded in source material redirect a review or authorize publishing. Third-party text should never become workflow authority.
Can the same model draft and review an article?
It can offer a second pass, but that is not independent verification. Use source checks and accountable editorial judgment for approval.
Take the next step
Continue with build an ai-assisted editorial review that does not approve itself for a complete explanation, practical decisions, and a source-backed reference. To compare the neighboring parts of the process, explore the full article workflow library.