How Boba.guide uses AI-assisted tools.
This policy explains where artificial intelligence and automated tools may support our work, what human review is required and which responsibilities are never delegated to automation.
Does Boba.guide use artificial intelligence?
Boba.guide may use AI-assisted and automated tools to support research organization, drafting, editing, formatting, classification, quality checks and workflow efficiency. These tools do not replace editorial responsibility or remove the need to verify important claims.
The use of a tool does not determine whether content is trustworthy. Reliability depends on the quality of the sources, the accuracy of the final text, the transparency of the process and the judgment applied before publication.
How AI-assisted tools may support our work
Research organization
Tools may help group questions, summarize notes, compare terminology or identify areas that require further research.
Draft preparation
AI may assist with outlines, preliminary wording, section organization or alternative ways to explain a concept.
Editing support
Tools may help identify repetition, unclear sentences, structural gaps, inconsistent terminology or formatting problems.
Data organization
Automation may assist with lists, tables, internal records, metadata and other structured editorial tasks.
Quality checks
Tools may flag broken links, duplicated passages, missing elements, inconsistent headings or possible factual conflicts.
Visual production
AI-generated or AI-assisted images may be used when appropriate, subject to editorial review, rights checks and accurate presentation.
What must be reviewed by a person?
- The central answer and purpose of the page
- Factual claims, measurements, ingredients and safety-sensitive statements
- Sources, citations, links and attributed material
- Recipe instructions, timing, storage and troubleshooting
- Product, shop and local-business information
- Commercial disclosures and conflicts of interest
- Final wording, structure, images and publication status
AI is not used as a source
A generated answer does not become evidence simply because it sounds confident or detailed. Claims must be supported by appropriate sources, direct documentation, product information, reliable references or clearly labeled editorial judgment.
What we do not delegate to AI
Final accountability
Responsibility for published content belongs to Boba.guide and its editorial team, not to a software provider.
Source verification
Automated output cannot replace checking the actual source, label, document, menu or official record.
Editorial independence
AI tools do not decide which brands, shops, products or viewpoints receive favorable treatment.
Safety decisions
Health, allergy, food-safety and dietary information requires cautious wording and appropriate source review.
Rights decisions
Copyright, privacy, attribution and permission questions are reviewed according to applicable policies and evidence.
Corrections
Material corrections are evaluated and approved through the editorial process rather than applied automatically.
How we address AI limitations
AI systems can produce incorrect facts, invented citations, outdated information, oversimplified explanations and wording that hides uncertainty. They may also repeat bias from training data or confuse similar products, ingredients, places and terms.
We reduce these risks through source checks, human editing, internal consistency review, link verification and clear qualification when information varies by recipe, brand, shop or location.
How we avoid generic or copied content
AI-assisted drafts must be transformed into useful, site-specific material with a clear purpose, verified facts, original organization and practical value. Generated filler, repetitive summaries and rewritten material that adds no independent value should not be published.
We do not instruct tools to imitate a living writer, reproduce protected text or disguise copied material as original editorial work.
How AI-assisted visuals may be used
AI-assisted images may illustrate drinks, ingredients, preparation, equipment or editorial concepts when they accurately represent the page and do not mislead readers into believing a fictional scene is documentary evidence.
Visuals are reviewed for obvious errors, unsafe preparation, inaccurate ingredients, misleading labels and inappropriate resemblance to protected branding or real individuals.
When is specific disclosure appropriate?
A page-level disclosure may be used when AI-generated material is central to the reader’s understanding, when an image could reasonably be mistaken for documentary photography or when additional transparency is warranted by context.
Routine use of editing, spelling, formatting or organizational tools may not require a separate notice on every page.
What happens when an AI-assisted error is found?
Errors are reviewed under the same standards as any other published mistake. The fact that a tool contributed to the problem does not reduce our responsibility to correct the page.
Material inaccuracies may result in a visible correction note, additional source review, changes to the workflow or temporary removal of content while the issue is investigated.
How this policy may change
AI tools, laws, platform requirements and editorial practices continue to evolve. Boba.guide may update this policy when its tools, risks, disclosures or review procedures materially change.
The current revision date appears at the end of this page.
Questions about AI-assisted content
Readers may report a suspected error, misleading image or transparency concern through our contact page. Include the relevant URL and a clear explanation of the concern.
Policies connected to responsible AI use
Each destination below appears once and covers a separate part of our editorial responsibilities.