Comparison

AI Content Disclosure Template

Free template for disclosing AI-generated or AI-assisted content. Covers tone, scope, page-level vs site-wide language, and machine-readable disclosure for crawlers.

By Ramanath, CTO & Co-Founder at Presenc AI · Last updated: May 15, 2026

Why You Need an AI Content Disclosure

Readers, regulators, and AI assistants increasingly want to know which parts of a page were written, drafted, or assisted by AI. A clear disclosure builds reader trust, complies with regional rules (the EU AI Act, several US state laws), and gives AI crawlers a signal about provenance that improves citation quality. The template below covers three disclosure tiers: site-wide, page-level, and per-section.

Tier 1: Site-Wide Disclosure

Place this in your editorial policy, footer, or /about page.

## Use of AI on This Site

We use AI tools in our content workflow. Specifically:

1. We draft outlines and first drafts with [model names, e.g., GPT-5, Claude Sonnet 4.6].
2. Every published article is reviewed, edited, and fact-checked by a named human editor.
3. AI-generated images are labelled in their caption and tagged with C2PA provenance metadata where possible.
4. We do not publish AI-generated content on the topics of [list sensitive topics, e.g., medical advice, legal advice, financial recommendations].
5. We disclose AI use on a per-article basis at the top of each article.

Last updated: [date]
Editor responsible: [name]

Tier 2: Page-Level Disclosure

Place this at the top of any article that used AI in its production. Adjust the language to reflect the actual workflow:

  • AI-drafted, human-edited: "This article was drafted with the help of [model] and reviewed and edited by [author name] before publication."
  • AI-summarised research, human-written: "Background research for this article was summarised using [model]. The article itself was written by [author name]."
  • AI-translated: "This article was translated from [source language] by [model] and reviewed by a human translator."
  • Fully AI-generated: "This article was generated by [model] from a curated set of inputs and reviewed by [editor name] before publication."

Tier 3: Per-Section Disclosure

For data tables, code samples, or charts that were generated or computed by AI, add an inline note:

<figure>
  <table>...</table>
  <figcaption>Source: [data source]. Table organised with assistance from [model]; reviewed [date].</figcaption>
</figure>

Machine-Readable Disclosure (for AI Crawlers)

Add structured metadata so AI assistants treating provenance as a citation signal see the disclosure even if the prose is paraphrased:

<script type="application/ld+json">
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Article",
  "headline": "Article title",
  "author": {
    "@type": "Person",
    "name": "Editor name"
  },
  "creativeWorkStatus": "Published",
  "aiAssisted": true,
  "aiAssistedDetails": "Drafted with GPT-5, edited by human author. No AI-generated images.",
  "datePublished": "2026-05-15",
  "dateModified": "2026-05-15"
}
</script>

Tone Guidance

Disclosures should be matter-of-fact, not defensive. Avoid language that apologises for AI use; AI is now a standard editorial tool. Phrases like "AI-drafted, human-edited" describe the workflow without prescribing a value judgement. Keep disclosures to one or two sentences at most; longer disclosures dilute reader attention and rarely improve compliance posture.

Common Mistakes

  1. Buried disclosures. A disclosure at the bottom of a 3,000-word article is technically present but functionally invisible. Put page-level disclosures above the fold.
  2. Over-disclosing. Marking grammar checks and spell-checks as "AI-assisted" floods the signal and reduces its value. Disclose meaningful AI contribution, not autocomplete.
  3. Generic site-wide language only. A blanket "we sometimes use AI" line is weaker than per-article disclosure for trust and compliance.
  4. No editor named. A named human editor is the single strongest trust signal in a disclosure.
  5. No machine-readable form. Schema.org markup is becoming the canonical machine-readable disclosure surface for AI assistants.

Frequently Asked Questions

In some jurisdictions, yes. The EU AI Act requires labelling of AI-generated content in certain categories from 2026. Several US states (California, New York, Texas) have AI-disclosure laws for political ads, deepfakes, and election-related content. Most other categories are governed by platform terms (Meta, TikTok, X) rather than law, but disclosure is increasingly expected by readers regardless.
For substantive AI contribution, yes — even heavily edited AI-drafted content should be disclosed. For minor uses (grammar checking, spell-check, autocomplete), no. The threshold is whether AI shaped the structure or content, not whether AI touched the page.
No. AI assistants increasingly treat well-disclosed content as more trustworthy than undisclosed AI content. Disclosure is becoming a positive signal in citation ranking, not a negative one.
The `aiAssisted: true` extension on the Article schema is the most widely-supported emerging convention. The `creativeWorkStatus` and `creator` (with type AI model) extensions are also gaining traction. The Schema.org draft on AI-generated content provenance is moving toward standardisation in 2026.

Track Your AI Visibility

See how your brand appears across ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and other AI platforms. Join the waitlist for early access.