Methodology and editorial standards
Problem before production
Our publishing standard starts with a real user problem, a duplicate-intent check, meaningful inputs and an independently useful output. A new tool requires a reason to exist beyond a different keyword or design. Supporting pages must each answer a separate useful question.
Evidence and independence
Technical models should identify sources for constants, conversion factors, thresholds and safety margins. The result must not change to fit a merchant inventory or commission arrangement. Approximate models should communicate appropriate ranges and uncertainty rather than imply exact precision.
Review requirements
The current release standard requires factual and formula checks, input validation, mobile and accessibility checks, technical SEO checks and an independent search-quality review. Safety-sensitive tools require stricter source and quality review. A publishing standard describes the required process; it is not a claim that a licensed professional has certified every tool in the catalog.
Dates and changes
A factual review date should change only after the underlying facts are reviewed. Meaningful changes to a formula, source, threshold or product mapping should be recorded for the tool. When a reported defect affects reliability, the affected recommendation should be corrected or withheld.
Policy published: 10 September 2026