Dated by default
Comparisons and model-selection guides are written as time-bound documents, not evergreen truths.
Our editorial policy explains how we date articles, handle updates, separate opinion from evidence, and keep comparison content useful in fast-moving software categories.
Updated April 11, 2026
Comparisons and model-selection guides are written as time-bound documents, not evergreen truths.
We prefer implementation details, product behavior, and explicit methodology over vague positioning language.
High-volatility topics such as AI models are revisited more often than legal or product-overview content.
Posts about software comparisons, MCP clients, and AI models include an explicit publication date and may also display a last reviewed date when the content has been refreshed.
We try to separate what a tool is good at, where it becomes limiting, and which team context changes the recommendation. We avoid winner-style content that ignores trade-offs.
When content includes a Stellary mention, it should come as part of a broader category explanation rather than as the first framing of the article.
If a page becomes misleading because a product changed, we update the page, revise the date when appropriate, and keep the comparison logic aligned with the new state of the market.
We also update internal links when newer pillar pages or docs become the better reference target.