Primary sources.
Zero shortcuts.
Every review applies a structured evidence-gated assessment, built from vendor documentation, public pricing, and reputable third-party feedback. Here's exactly what that looks like.
Step 1 — We gather primary sources
Every review starts by collecting the vendor's current documentation, public pricing pages, product materials, and changelogs — plus reputable third-party feedback. No vendor demos and no special treatment: only sources a reader could verify independently.
We map the tool against a typical growing-team use case. If onboarding is poorly documented, that's in the review. If documentation is missing, that's in the review. If the free trial requires a credit card, that's in the review.
Step 2 — We assess the evidence record
Our scorecard uses one weighted formula. A factor is scored only when the approved evidence record supports it:
Does it solve the buyer's actual workflow problem?
Is onboarding, implementation, and first value clearly documented?
Are pricing claims current, direct, and supported by approved sources?
Does the tool remain practical as a team grows across sites, clients, or workflows?
Does it connect to the surrounding stack without creating hidden work?
Are support channels, documentation, and known limitations visible enough to assess?
Are buyer risks, plan caveats, and implementation constraints stated clearly?
Step 3 — We score and publish
Each factor is scored only from approved evidence. The formula cannot be overridden to favor a commercial relationship, and a factor stays unscored where the evidence is insufficient. Scores are tied to the assessment date and withheld when the record is incomplete or stale.
We include both what the tool does well AND where it falls short. A high affiliate commission never changes a negative finding. If a tool has a known reliability issue, it's in the review.