Review marking controls for generated text exports

When to use this guide

A writing tool displays an AI label in its editor, but exported plain text contains no record of the system's marking approach.

This is a fictional implementation scenario. The procedure below is Article 50 Hub's suggested working method, not a prescribed legal form, a customer result or a claim that every step is an additional statutory requirement.

Review procedure

1. List editor, copy, download and API output paths that expose generated text.

2. Document the actual marking and detection design and its known limitations.

3. Test representative exports and downstream transformations with the responsible technical team.

4. Record open feasibility and adequacy questions for qualified review rather than assigning a blanket pass.

What the example review finds

• The editor label disappears on export.

• The team has no test method for its claimed marking control.

Keep these example observations separate from your own results. An unknown or untested state should stay open until the relevant evidence has been inspected.

Fields for your working record

• Text output path

• Implemented method

• Transformation

• Test method

• Unresolved question

Use the downloadable blank worksheet linked on this page to connect the observed behavior with the deployed system. Add a reviewer, date, evidence reference, unresolved questions and a next action. The worksheet is editable locally and does not upload your records to Article 50 Hub.

Completion and handoff

Close the task only for the scope actually reviewed. Preserve the result that another authorized reviewer can reproduce, identify the owner of remaining work, and record a retest when the implementation changes. A completed worksheet is not a substitute for the underlying evidence.

Decision boundary

Text marking has format-specific limits; this worksheet does not establish that any simple tag or disclaimer is sufficient.

The official references below provide legal or technical context. Resolve applicability and exception questions with the responsible qualified reviewer; use the product's tools to organize implementation work within that assessment.