Most “autopilot” tools publish drafts
and call it done.
Ours refuses. Every article is scored against the brief it was written from, and anything that falls short is held rather than published. You get thirty articles a month on your own site, and a straight answer about the ones that did not make it.
The category sells autopilot and ships a drafting tool.
Read the reviews of any content automation tool and the same sentence turns up. People buy it expecting to walk away, and find they cannot: the output needs editing before it is fit to publish. The tools are sold on volume, and volume is the one thing that is easy.
We took the opposite position, and we built the checking before we built the volume. Six checks run on every draft. They are not scores and there is no threshold to argue about: each one is true or false, and an article publishes only when all six are true.
The one that matters most is sourcing. Ari researches with live search and opens the pages it intends to rely on, and every external link in the finished article has to be one of those pages, checked against the record of what it actually retrieved. A confident citation to a study that does not exist is the failure that costs a company its credibility, and it is the failure a human reviewer is least likely to catch, because a fabricated URL looks exactly like a real one until you click it. That one cannot reach your site.
The other five: the markup has to be clean, the length has to be inside the band the brief commissioned, no brackets or placeholders anywhere, no sentence or phrase repeated to fill space, and the prose has to clear a banned list of the words and shapes that mark text as machine-written.
Some months that means you get twenty-six articles instead of thirty. A customer who receives twenty-six good ones and an explanation is better served than one who receives thirty and has to check them.
Research, write, check, publish, then explain itself.
We analyse your site and your competitors, cluster the keywords you could realistically win, and build a content plan from the gaps. You approve the plan once. After that it runs.
Every article starts from a brief covering the entities, questions and structure the piece has to cover to be worth citing. The draft is then graded against that brief and revised until it improves or stops improving.
Articles go straight to your WordPress, EmDash, git or webhook-connected site with tags and structured data. Anything held shows up in your dashboard with the score and the reason attached.
Backlinks, without the pattern Google names in its spam policy.
Several tools in this category run a reciprocal link exchange: your site links to another member, and that member links back. Google’s link spam policy describes that pattern directly, and describes it as a violation.
Our network is non-reciprocal. Links are placed on relevance, from members whose topic actually matches yours, and volume per site is capped. It is slower to build. It is also still there after the next spam update.
One price. One site. Cancel whenever.
What we will not pretend about.
This is AI writing. We are not going to tell you a person drafted it. What we will tell you is that it is held to a standard before it reaches your site, which is more than most tools in this category do.
Rankings take months. Anyone promising results in weeks is selling you something. Content compounds, and the first months are the investment.
You keep control. Every article can be reviewed before it goes out if you would rather work that way. Autopilot is the default, not an obligation.