1
Personalising without rewriting from scratch
Templates save time, but broad openings and reusable capability claims can make a strong freelancer sound like every other applicant.
Loading
Preparing the page for you.
Preparing the page for you.
Review proposals, outreach and client replies for specificity, trust and natural communication before an important message leaves your outbox.
Seven free scans every seven days after sign-in. Results are review guidance and cannot prove authorship.
A practical review layer
Common challenges
Freelancers need to move quickly without sounding interchangeable. Reusable workflows help, but clients still look for evidence that the proposal understands their project and that the person behind it can communicate clearly.
Templates save time, but broad openings and reusable capability claims can make a strong freelancer sound like every other applicant.
Over-edited proposals may sound fluent while saying little about scope, constraints, trade-offs or the client's actual brief.
A proposal, follow-up email and delivery note should feel like they came from the same professional. Abrupt tone changes can weaken trust even when each message is individually clear.
How AI Tools Detector helps
Choose the detector that matches the message. Proposal review focuses on client fit, email review focuses on communication, and the humaniser checker helps when rewriting has made the voice feel mechanical.
Review generic outreach, vague capability claims, repetitive persuasive structure and missing project context.
Review a proposalCheck follow-ups, introductions and client replies for robotic tone, over-formality and unclear intent.
Review an emailReview rewritten copy for forced synonym changes, inconsistent rhythm and surface-level paraphrasing.
Check rewritten copyExample use cases
Trust and responsible use
A high or low signal does not determine whether a freelancer is capable, honest or suitable for a project. Review the brief, portfolio, communication and delivered work alongside any writing-pattern guidance.
Raw submitted text is not stored in scan history or reports. Avoid submitting content you are not authorised to process.
Writing-pattern signals cannot prove authorship, intent, quality or policy compliance.
Formal, edited, translated and templated writing can produce uncertain or misleading signals.
Important decisions need context, supporting evidence and accountable human judgement.
FAQ
Practical answers about interpretation, privacy and appropriate use.
No. It reviews writing and structural signals. Pricing, scope, expertise and commercial fit still require your own judgement and client context.
Yes, provided you have permission to process the text. The most useful revision is usually adding project-specific context rather than simply trying to lower a score.
Raw submitted text is not stored in scan history or reports. Avoid submitting confidential client information that should not be processed by an external service.
The goal should be accurate, useful and authentic communication. Follow client or platform disclosure rules and focus on making the work genuinely specific and well reviewed.
Check content before it matters
Choose a focused tool, review the signals, and make the final decision with the context only you have.