Editorial policy
The standards this site holds itself to, including an honest account of where AI is and is not used in producing the content.
Hamzify covers a field where hype travels faster than evidence. This page sets out the standards every article is held to, so you can judge whether to trust what you read here.
What gets published#
Hamzify publishes first-hand material: tools used on real tasks, projects actually built, workflows actually run. It is not an aggregator, and it does not summarise other people's announcements as though that were reporting.
Five formats, each with its own requirements:
| Format | Must state |
|---|---|
| Review | Version tested, time spent, the task it was used for, who should skip it |
| Comparison | The identical task given to each tool, and a recommendation per use case |
| Build log | Goal, stack, tools, timeline, what went wrong, final outcome |
| Experiment | Hypothesis, setup, method, what was measured, limitations |
| Workflow / resource | What it assumes, where it breaks down, when it was last checked |
Testing standards#
- Real tasks only. Tools are judged on work with a definition of done, not on toy prompts chosen to make something look good.
- Version and date, always. This tooling changes weekly. Every review names the version used and the date tested, because a verdict without a date is not useful.
- Enough time to form a view. Nothing gets reviewed after twenty minutes of use.
- Failures are reported. When something did not work, that is in the article, not edited out.
- No fabricated numbers. If a figure appears — hours, token counts, pass rates — it was measured. Estimates are labelled as estimates.
What this site will not do#
- Invent metrics, benchmarks, ratings or test results.
- Publish a review of a tool that has not been used.
- Present a hypothetical build as something that was shipped.
- Use AI to generate an article that claims first-hand experience nobody had.
- Accept payment for a verdict, a ranking or a place in a comparison.
- Add star ratings or scores. A single number implies a precision that hands-on testing of fast-moving tools cannot honestly claim, so verdicts are written as prose with an explicit "who should skip this".
How AI is used here#
Given the subject, this deserves stating plainly. AI tools are used on this site the way they are used in the work it describes: for drafting help, editing, restructuring and code assistance. They are not used to invent experiences, results or opinions. Every published article reflects work a human actually did and is reviewed line by line by a human before publishing. The byline is the accountability.
Sample and template content that ships with the site is labelled as such on the page itself.
Sources and attribution#
Claims about what a tool does link to the vendor's own documentation where possible, with the date checked. Where an article builds on someone else's work or idea, it links to them. Screenshots are original unless credited.
Updates and corrections#
Evergreen articles are revisited when the tools they cover change materially. Updated pieces show an "Updated" date next to the publication date. Errors are handled under the corrections policy.
Independence#
Hamzify has no investors, no parent company and no commercial relationships that affect coverage. Some links are affiliate links, disclosed under the affiliate disclosure. Where a tool is made by someone the author knows personally, that is disclosed in the article.
Contact#
Editorial questions, corrections and complaints: hamzajadoon71@gmail.com.