How we work

We publish specifications, prices, and regulatory detail about agricultural drones. Those are exactly the kind of facts that are easy to get wrong and hard for a reader to check. This page explains how we try to get them right, and how you can hold us to it.

Articles are AI-drafted and machine-verified

Our articles are drafted by AI, checked against cited sources by a second, independent system, and published under editorial accountability. We are saying this plainly because you should not have to guess.

That does not mean nobody is responsible for what appears here. It means the drafting is automated, the checking is automated and adversarial, and the standards those systems are held to are set deliberately and published on this page.

The drafting model is not allowed to remember specifications

This is the most important rule we have, and it exists because of a specific failure.

Language models will confidently produce a drone model that does not exist, with plausible specifications attached. Ask one for the leading agricultural drones and you can get a tidy list containing machines that were never built. That is not a hypothetical: the previous version of this site published exactly that.

So the drafting system is never asked what it knows. It only ever receives:

• the retrieved text of the sources gathered for that article,
• the verified specification files we maintain by hand, and
• the outline for the piece.

Any number, price, date, or model name that is not present in that supplied material is not permitted in the article. A drone that does not appear in our own specification files cannot be named at all.

Every figure carries its source and its date

Specifications on this site are rendered directly from our source files rather than typed into the page. Each value shows the domain it came from and the date we last checked it. Where a figure is older than we would like, the page says so instead of hiding it.

This is why our spec tables have a “checked” column. A specification without a date is a specification you cannot evaluate.

A second system tries to disprove the first

After an article is drafted, it is broken into individual factual claims, and each claim is checked against the retrieved sources by a model from a different vendor than the one that wrote it.

The reason for using a different vendor is straightforward: models from the same family tend to share the same blind spots. A checker that thinks like the writer will agree with the writer. We want the second pass to be capable of genuine disagreement.

If a claim is contradicted by the sources, the article is discarded rather than repaired. If too many claims cannot be verified either way, it is held back for review instead of published.

What stops a bad article from reaching you

Before anything is published it has to pass a set of automated checks. These fail closed — if a check cannot run, the article is treated as failed rather than waved through. There is no override switch, deliberately.

An article is discarded outright if it contains a placeholder link, a broken image reference, a link to a page that does not exist, a product we cannot verify, or a claim the checker contradicted. It is held back for review if the evidence behind it is thin — too few sources, no authoritative source among them, or too many claims left unverified.

Images

Product photography comes from manufacturer press materials where it exists, because a real photograph of a machine is more accurate than any illustration of it. Cover images, thumbnails, and scene photography are produced by us, generated from real reference imagery rather than from imagination.

Captions credit the source material. Where an image is a composite or an illustration rather than a photograph of the specific machine, the caption says so.

Corrections

We will get things wrong. When we do, we want to hear about it and fix it visibly rather than quietly. See the corrections page for how that works and how to report an error.

Who is accountable

Editorial responsibility for this site sits with a named publisher — see the about page. Articles are bylined “AgriDrones Editorial” rather than to an invented individual. We do not publish under fabricated author identities, and there are no stock-photo staff writers here.