Editorial Policy

AI Tools Radar helps you pick AI tools based on tests, not hype. This page explains how we research, test, score, and update articles.

What we publish

• Reviews: One tool, tested by hand, explained in plain language
• Radar: Up to seven new tools each week with a short verdict
• Comparisons: Side-by-side tables and who should use what
• Model hubs: Pages we update when big models launch

Research process

Before a full review we check:

1. Search demand (Google and Bing autocomplete, suggested queries)
2. Competition quality (can we add depth, tables, or fresh tests?)
3. Lane fit (agents, creators or slides, builders)
4. Hands-on access (signup, one real workflow, screenshots when possible)

Detailed methodology: AI tool ranking methodology (2026). Questions: Contact.

Scoring and verdicts

We use plain-language verdicts:

• Use: Worth trying for the stated audience now
• Watch: Promising but immature, unclear pricing, or narrow fit
• Skip: Better alternatives exist, policy risk, or no meaningful search demand

We state limitations openly, including for products we build.

Updates and corrections

Articles show published and updated dates. Material changes get a changelog block on radar and hub pages. Report errors to [email protected]; we correct factual mistakes promptly.

Independence

Affiliate links may fund the Site. They do not determine verdicts. Sponsored content is labeled when we publish it.

What we avoid

• Unlabeled AI-generated reviews without human testing
• Jailbreak, detector spam, or surveillance tools as core coverage
• Copying vendor marketing pages without added testing notes