Marketing Claims Review

Own claim substantiation, positioning, comparisons, and first-visitor clarity regardless of file location.

Workflow

1. Confirm pages, audience, and audit-only or authorized rewrite mode.
2. Build a capability map with implementation and runtime evidence taking precedence over marketing prose, demos, and roadmap material.
3. Classify material claims as accurate, unclear, unsupported, exaggerated, stale, or false. A performance, scale, or adoption number is accurate only when its source exists: the benchmark or data, its method, and the version measured.
4. Test whether a first-time visitor can identify the product, intended user, problem, mechanism, difference, limitations, and next action.
5. For each problematic claim, cite evidence and recommend keep, rewrite, move, remove, qualify, or prove.
6. Rewrite only when authorized, preserving distinctions between shipped, partial, experimental, planned, and unsupported behavior.
7. After an authorized rewrite, use text-improve to improve the prose without weakening substantiation, necessary qualifications, or intentional voice.

Use docs-review for repository-document structure and discoverability, and docs-drift-review only for drift caused by the current change. Mark a comparative claim about another product unverified unless current, authoritative public evidence supports it, and cite that evidence.

Do not infer capabilities from aspirations or invent proof.

Finish with scoped claims, evidence, dispositions, authorized edits, and unresolved proof needs.