AI Limitations & Human Review

What AI outputs may get wrong

• Factual inaccuracy — names, dates, statistics, citations, and quoted claims may be invented or transposed even when the surrounding prose sounds confident.
• Context loss — without your full background knowledge, models may miss internal politics, prior commitments, audience sensitivities, or implicit constraints.
• Omission — important caveats, qualifications, or counter-arguments present in your original draft may be smoothed away in the rewrite.
• Tone misjudgement — what reads as "warm" or "professional" in one culture, industry, or relationship may not in another.
• Legal & regulatory exposure — outputs may not comply with the specific disclosure, accessibility, or industry rules that apply to your work.
• Originality — rewrites may unintentionally echo source phrasing or third-party material; the user is responsible for verifying originality.

Human review steps we recommend

• Read the rewrite end-to-end before sending or publishing it.
• Verify every name, number, date, citation, and quoted claim against an authoritative source.
• Confirm the tone is appropriate for the relationship and the channel.
• Check that nothing material to your meaning was removed during simplification.
• Apply any disclosure, compliance, or accessibility rules that govern the destination context.

High-stakes contexts

For legal, medical, financial, safety-critical, regulatory, or academic submissions, the bar for human review is higher, not lower. AI-assisted drafts should be reviewed by a qualified human — and, where required, by a licensed professional — before they are relied upon. RewriteAIForMe does not provide professional advice in any regulated field.