Is this an AI claim substantiation checklist?

Yes, for one vendor page or claim set. Use it to copy each AI-related sentence, assign the claim type, match the evidence needed, and prepare buyer questions. For a single claim type evidence map, use the AI claim substantiation guide.

What should an AI product claim evidence checklist include?

It should include the exact claim text, source URL, checked date, claim type, matching evidence artifact, visible scope limit, and the buyer question you will send to the vendor. Do not replace those fields with a generic product brochure or security deck.

How is this different from AI vendor due diligence?

This checklist walks the public wording sentence by sentence. Vendor due diligence is broader and happens before a buying decision. A claim review can feed that process, but it does not approve, reject, rank, or certify a vendor.

AI vendor claim evidence checklist: review one page or claim set

Last reviewed June 2, 2026

Use this checklist when one vendor page or pasted claim set is open in front of you. Walk each AI-related sentence in order, assign the claim type, match the evidence a buyer would expect, and note where scope limits or absolute wording exceed what is shown.

Check one AI vendor claim set How the evidence method works

Fastest path: copy one exact vendor sentence that matches this pattern, then open the checker. Add the public URL only if you want readable page context recorded alongside the wording. The result is an evidence-burden note you can reuse in vendor follow-up or internal review, not a verdict. Not sure what a result looks like? See a sample receipt.

What to verify before you rely on the claim

Exact claim text and the vendor's page URL.
Evidence matched to the claim type, not a general product document.
Scope limits visible in the vendor's user-facing language.

Sources behind AI vendor claim evidence checklist

FTC Automators case page
· Case timeline through February 27, 2024
Source for AI-linked ecommerce income, profitability, passive-investor, and storefront outcome claims.
FTC Workado proposed order release
· April 28, 2025
Source for AI detector accuracy and average-user performance wording.
FTC accessiBe case page
· April 22, 2025
Source for AI-powered accessibility compliance wording.
FTC IntelliVision press release
· December 3, 2024
Source for facial recognition accuracy, bias, and anti-spoofing marketing claims.

Documented AI vendor claim evidence checklist examples

"use artificial intelligence to boost earnings for consumers' e-commerce storefronts"

ROI / Outcome

Source and date: FTC Automators case page · Case timeline through February 27, 2024
Evidence signal: AI contribution is used to support earnings wording without separating the AI workflow from coaching, inventory, storefront, and marketplace factors.
Evidence gap: A buyer should ask for store-level outcome distribution, total costs, unsuccessful-store rate, time to revenue, and a method for isolating the AI feature from surrounding services.
Buyer question: For an AI-boosted ecommerce earnings claim, what result remains after coaching, inventory, marketplace, and customer-labor effects are separated?

Load this sample in the checker

"developed using a wide range of material, including blog posts and Wikipedia entries"

Accuracy / Performance

Source and date: FTC Workado proposed order release · April 28, 2025
Evidence signal: Training-material breadth used to support average-user accuracy without showing the content mix or benchmark context.
Evidence gap: A buyer should ask for the training and test content categories, general-purpose benchmark, false positive rate, false negative rate, and comparison baseline behind this wording.
Buyer question: For a wide-range training-material claim, what content categories and benchmark show the detector works outside academic content?

Load this sample in the checker

"AI product could make websites compliant with accessibility guidelines"

Compliance / Safety

Source and date: FTC accessiBe · April 22, 2025
Evidence signal: Broad compliance promise with no visible exclusions.
Evidence gap: A buyer should ask for the standard version, issue coverage, audit method, manual remediation boundary, and maintenance limitation.
Buyer question: For an accessibility compliance claim, what scope limit should appear directly in the marketing copy?

Load this sample in the checker

"trained on millions of faces"

Accuracy / Performance

Source and date: FTC IntelliVision · December 3, 2024
Evidence signal: Training-data scale wording used to imply performance or bias coverage without showing dataset composition or subgroup results.
Evidence gap: A buyer should ask for dataset composition, representativeness, duplicate handling, subgroup coverage, and the measured link between training data and deployment performance.
Buyer question: For a trained on millions of faces claim, what dataset documentation shows the claimed scale supports the intended demographic and deployment setting?

Load this sample in the checker

Steps for checking AI vendor claim evidence checklist

Copy the exact AI claim before editing Claim text and source date
What exact words will appear on the page: accuracy number, compliance promise, replacement claim, outcome claim, or first-of-kind wording?
Assign the claim type Accuracy, automation, compliance, ROI, first/only/best, or vague AI-powered
Which claim type creates the highest evidence burden in this sentence?
Match the claim to evidence Benchmark, audit, subgroup test, customer sample, comparison set, or workflow documentation
Does the evidence test the same use case, content type, audience, and date implied by the copy?
Check whether a scope limit is visible in the claim Content type, model version, standard version, customer segment, or human review boundary
Can a buyer see where the claim applies and where it does not apply without opening a separate document?
Identify absolute wording that exceeds the evidence scope Wording boundary reference and limitation note
Does the vendor's copy use words like any, zero, fully, first, only, best, or replace that exceed the tested scope?
Keep a source record Source URL, checked date, method note, and owner
If a buyer asks for support later, can the team produce the source, date, method, limitation, and owner behind the claim?

Evidence map for AI vendor claim evidence checklist

Claim pattern	Evidence needed	Buyer question
AI vendor evidence checklist request	The page URL, exact claim text, claim owner, claim type, source date, and the evidence artifact that supports each sentence.	Which AI claim on this page should we ask about first, and what evidence artifact should the vendor produce for it?
Accuracy number in headline copy	Benchmark, sample size, model list, input categories, error rates, and test date.	What details should be visible next to the performance number or linked from it?
AI replaces a professional task	Task boundary, human review point, escalation process, unsupported cases, and quality testing.	Which word in the claim could make a reader think no expert review is needed?
Compliance, safety, or bias-free claim	Standard version, audit method, subgroup metrics, exclusions, and retest cadence.	What narrower result can be stated without implying full coverage?
First, only, best, or most advanced claim	Comparison universe, date checked, source of comparison, and update responsibility.	Is the comparison still supportable if a competitor changes positioning tomorrow?

Evidence buyers need for AI vendor claim evidence checklist

Exact claim text and the vendor's page URL.
Evidence matched to the claim type, not a general product document.
Scope limits visible in the vendor's user-facing language.
A record of source URL, checked date, and claim owner.
An assessment of whether the vendor's wording matches the available evidence.

Buyer questions for AI vendor claim evidence checklist

For this claim on the page, which phrase creates the highest evidence burden?
What source, benchmark, audit, customer sample, or workflow note would a buyer reasonably ask for after reading this sentence?
Does the copy distinguish a current capability from a roadmap capability?
Does the vendor's copy use absolute or broad wording that exceeds the evidence scope?

Safer wording for AI vendor claim evidence checklist

Reported X% on a named benchmark covering specified inputs and model versions.
AI drafts first-pass output for human review in defined use cases.
Supports selected accessibility remediation tasks; final review and maintenance remain separate.
One of the early products built for a named workflow, based on a stated comparison date.

AI vendor claim evidence checklist questions

Is this an AI claim substantiation checklist?: Yes, for one vendor page or claim set. Use it to copy each AI-related sentence, assign the claim type, match the evidence needed, and prepare buyer questions. For a single claim type evidence map, use the AI claim substantiation guide.
What should an AI product claim evidence checklist include?: It should include the exact claim text, source URL, checked date, claim type, matching evidence artifact, visible scope limit, and the buyer question you will send to the vendor. Do not replace those fields with a generic product brochure or security deck.
How is this different from AI vendor due diligence?: This checklist walks the public wording sentence by sentence. Vendor due diligence is broader and happens before a buying decision. A claim review can feed that process, but it does not approve, reject, rank, or certify a vendor.

Method and limits

This checklist walks one vendor page or claim set sentence by sentence. For pre-purchase procurement review, use the due diligence checklist; for high-burden marketing phrase patterns, use the marketing claims checklist. It does not provide legal advice, compliance certification, purchase recommendation, or a final truth determination.

Cite this page for source-backed evidence gaps and buyer questions, not as a truth finding, legal conclusion, compliance certification, company accusation, or company rating. If you have the exact vendor wording, Check one AI vendor claim set and paste one sentence first. If a source has changed, or you have supporting evidence or a company response, send a private correction or source note.