Who is responsible
cutGPT Guides are published by the cutGPT Editorial Team, part of ZStack Capital LLC. The team is responsible for selecting topics, checking the finished page, maintaining source links, and deciding whether a correction or update is needed. The organization—not an AI model—is accountable for what appears here.
Our guides offer practical education about AI-assisted work. They are not medical, legal, financial, tax, or other licensed professional advice. When a topic could affect a high-stakes decision, we point readers toward an appropriate primary authority and tell them to seek qualified help where necessary.
How a guide is created
- Define a real task. We start with a specific reader problem and the decisions the page should help that reader make.
- Inspect the product and workflow. Where a cutGPT tool is discussed, we check the current interface, inputs, outputs, and limits instead of describing an imagined feature.
- Research important claims. We prefer government publications, standards bodies, universities, original research, and first-party documentation. A source must support the statement beside it; a respected domain alone is not enough.
- Draft for action. Each article should give the reader a usable process, examples or prompt patterns, failure modes, and a verification step—not merely define a topic.
- Review before publishing. We check headings, internal links, external sources, dates, factual claims, examples, limitations, and whether the title accurately describes the page.
How AI may assist
AI tools may help outline a draft, suggest alternative wording, or identify questions worth investigating. We do not cite an AI response as evidence. A human reviewer is expected to open the supporting sources, remove unsupported claims, edit generic output, and approve the final page. If a future article contains original testing or a named specialist review, that article will say so directly rather than implying it across the entire site.
Source and link standards
For changing facts, we look for a current source and include enough context for a reader to judge it. For policy, safety, law, product behavior, or technical mechanisms, we prioritize the organization that sets the rule or operates the system. Secondary explanations can add context, but they should not replace an available primary source. We avoid decorative citations, invented references, and videos that have not been checked for identity and relevance.
External pages can move or change after publication. A working link does not by itself prove that the nearby claim remains accurate, so material guides are rechecked when the subject or product changes.
Advertising and editorial independence
Advertising helps fund cutGPT, but advertisers do not select guide topics or approve conclusions. Editorial links are not placed because an advertiser paid for a favorable statement. An ad should remain visually distinct from guide copy and controls. If we later publish sponsored or affiliate material, it will be labeled clearly at the point where a reader encounters it.
Updates and corrections
Each guide displays its publication and updated dates. A changed date should reflect a meaningful review or revision, not an automatic refresh. Small spelling fixes may not change the displayed date; corrections that affect a claim, recommendation, source, workflow, or limitation should.
To report a factual error, broken source, unclear disclosure, or product mismatch, email [email protected] with the guide URL, the passage, and any supporting source. We review correction requests and update the page when the evidence warrants it.