Editorial Policy

We start with official vendor pages, pricing pages, public product documentation, app marketplace listings, platform API documentation, and hands-on checks where feasible. For Shopify coverage, we check details such as API access scopes and order status behavior against Shopify documentation.

For WooCommerce coverage, we check WooCommerce REST API documentation and merchant docs. Fast-changing details, including pricing, AI packaging, integration support, and platform permissions, are dated when possible or framed as demo questions.

We do not invent pricing, star ratings, customer stories, benchmarks, or test results.

Tool pages are evaluated against buyer-useful criteria: ecommerce data access, knowledge grounding, channel coverage, handoff quality, pricing transparency, implementation risk, governance, and fit by store type. A clear 'skip this if...'

note is more useful than a flattering paragraph that could describe any vendor. When a tool is recommended for a use case, the page should explain the mechanism behind the fit and the failure mode to watch.

We include tools based on relevance to the topic and usefulness to the reader. Some tools appear on multiple pages because they matter to more than one use case.

Inclusion does not mean endorsement, and absence does not mean a tool is weak. The goal is to help readers build a credible shortlist, then verify fit with their own store data, workflows, compliance needs, and support team.

We separate tested observations, official documentation, vendor claims, and editorial judgment. A tested observation should name the workflow tested.

Official documentation should link to the source. Vendor claims stay framed as claims unless we can verify them.

Editorial judgment should explain the reasoning and tradeoff. If a page blurs those categories, we rewrite it.

We use [Google Search Central's guidance on helpful, reliable, people-first content](https://developers. google.

com/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpful-content) as a quality checklist: clear sourcing, evidence of expertise, useful original analysis, and content that helps a reader complete a task. We also use the [FTC's endorsement guidance](https://consumer.

ftc. gov/business-guidance/resources/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking) as a disclosure guardrail: if a commercial relationship or incentive could affect how readers weigh a recommendation, it should be disclosed clearly.

We review and update content on a rolling basis. High-traffic pages, tool comparisons, and pricing-sensitive pages are reviewed at least quarterly.

Other pages are reviewed at least every six months. Ecommerce support software changes quickly, so we prioritize updates where the reader impact is highest.

Each page displays a last-updated date so you can see when the information was last checked.

When we find a factual error, we correct it promptly. If you spot outdated pricing, inaccurate feature descriptions, broken source links, missing caveats, or unclear separation between tested facts and vendor claims, use the contact page.

Pricing, packaging, AI limits, and integration scope change quickly, so purchasing decisions should be verified directly with the vendor before contract signature.

AI Ecommerce is editorially independent. Commercial partnerships do not determine which tools appear in our content.

If a specific link or page ever has a commercial relationship that could affect how readers interpret a recommendation, it must be disclosed in plain language near the recommendation, not hidden in a footer. Our evaluations reflect editorial judgment based on available information at the time of writing.