Skip to content
best ai agent.inEvidence directory⌕ SearchExplore
Home / Trust / Author Attribution

Trust & methodology

Author Attribution

How BestAIAgent.in actually attributes content: git commit history in a public repository, not per-page named authors or reviewers.

This page previously described a per-page author/reviewer byline system with named editorial staff and a review board. No such system exists — pages don't carry author, reviewer, or nextReviewDue fields (the real AuthorityPage type in lib/authority-pages.ts has none of them). This page now says what's actually true.

The real attribution model

This is a static, source-controlled site. Every change to every page is a real, public, timestamped git commit in the project's GitHub repository, with a real author. That commit history — not a byline — is the actual record of who wrote or changed what, and it's more precise than a name in a page footer would be, since it's tied to the exact diff rather than a whole page.

Why there's no separate reviewer sign-off

For entity content, the evidence record itself (see /trust/evidence-methodology) is the reviewable artifact — anyone can re-fetch the cited source and check the hash themselves, which is a stronger check than trusting a named reviewer's word. For editorial content, review happens through the same pull-request process as any other code change to this repository, documented in CONTRIBUTING.md.

Related methodology pages

Source receipts

  • Internal — lib/authority-pages.ts (AuthorityPage type). Confirms no author/reviewer fields exist.
  • Internal — CONTRIBUTING.md. The real review process (pull requests against a public repository).

Last reviewed

  • Page last reviewed: 2026-09-02