Marketing AI evaluation for the copy, claims, and captions your model writes. We grade every sample against your brand voice and your facts, so nothing ships that you would not have approved yourself.
We grade outputs. We do not train models, run fine-tuning, or sell experts we cannot verify.
Marketing AI evaluation is the review of AI-written marketing copy before it goes live: ads, landing pages, email subject lines, social captions, and product descriptions. Marketing teams use it when a model writes at a volume no human team can fully re-read. Good means the claims are true, the voice matches the brand, and nothing in the copy creates risk you did not sign up for.
Marketing copy is where a model's confidence does the most damage, because the copy is designed to be believed.
"The fastest platform on the market." "Save 80% on every order." The model invents superlatives and statistics because punchy copy gets rewarded and nobody checked the numbers. False claims in ads are not just embarrassing; they invite complaints and regulator attention. We grade every checkable claim against your sources.
A premium brand writing like a discount warehouse, or a playful startup sounding like a bank. The copy is grammatical and the offer is right, but the personality is wrong. Customers notice before you do. We grade voice against your brand guide, the same way human reviewers judge tone.
"Guaranteed results." "Doctors recommend." "Risk-free." Certain phrases carry legal and platform risk depending on your industry and where the ad runs. The model does not know your compliance boundaries. We flag language that looks risky so your team can decide, with the exact phrase quoted in the report.
You asked for twenty ad variants and got one idea in twenty costumes. Sameness defeats the point of variant testing: there is nothing to learn. We grade variety across a batch, not just quality within a sample, so you can see when the model is out of ideas.
Prices, statistics, product capabilities, timelines, comparisons with competitors. Each one gets checked against the sources you provide. An invented stat in a headline is a P0; a slightly overstated benefit is a P1. We quote the exact line and the source it contradicts, so your team can fix the prompt or the fact sheet behind it.
Send your brand guide or a handful of pieces that sound like you, and we build voice criteria into the rubric: diction, sentence length, humor level, formality. Reviewers then score how far each sample drifts. This pairs well with hallucination detection, since marketing hallucinations usually arrive wearing your brand voice.
Absolute guarantees, health claims, financial promises, superlatives about competitors. We are not lawyers and this is not legal review, but we flag the phrases that tend to cause trouble so nothing ships without a human decision. The report quotes each one with its context.
When you ask for twenty ad variants, you are buying twenty different angles, not one angle in twenty fonts. We grade the batch as a batch: how many distinct messages, hooks, and structures actually appear, and where the model starts repeating itself. Sameness across variants is reported as its own pattern with examples, because a variant set with no real variety teaches your testing nothing. This is the check most teams skip and most need.
You send 20 to 50 model outputs plus your rubric, or we help you write one. Include your brand guide and fact sources.
Trained reviewers grade every sample against the rubric, backed by automated checks for claim consistency and repetition.
Sample-level grades, issue patterns, recommended fixes, and a walkthrough call.
Yes. Send your brand guide, or send five pieces of copy that sound exactly like you and we will extract the voice criteria into the rubric. Voice is graded on every sample, not just the ones that feel off.
No. We flag language that commonly creates risk, like absolute guarantees or unsubstantiated health claims, and quote it in the report. Anything we flag should still go through your own legal or compliance review before it ships.
Yes. Each variant gets its own grade, and we add a batch-level read on variety: whether the variants actually differ in angle and message, or just reshuffle the same sentence. Sameness across a variant set is reported as its own pattern.
Tell us the industry when you send samples. We tighten the rubric around claims and risky language for finance, health, and similar spaces. The grading gets stricter; the process stays the same.
Two to three business days for 20 to 50 samples, including the walkthrough call. If you are mid-campaign and need a read on a smaller batch first, talk to us and we will scope it.
No. We grade and recommend fixes; your team writes. The report shows exactly which lines failed and what to change in the prompt or brief behind them, which usually fixes the next batch too.
Send 20 to 50 samples. Get every one graded, with the patterns and the fixes.
Not sure where to start? Talk to us and we will point you at the right evaluation.