An AI detector flagged my work as AI-generated. What do I send the client?
Send the work record, not an argument. A detector reports a probability about text style; your record shows the actual process: which steps ran, which were yours, what the AI produced, and what you changed. Send the handover link with the short reply on this page, and let the client read the process directly.
Detector scores feel decisive because they arrive as numbers. They are not evidence about your work: they estimate how a text reads, they disagree with each other, and they flag careful human writing regularly. Arguing about the score keeps the conversation on the detector's ground. The record moves it to yours.
What the record shows, concretely, is the division of labour. Steps carry producer labels: the research the AI ran, the draft it produced, the sections you rewrote, the checks you performed. A client who suspected the whole deliverable was one unedited generation can see the human steps inside it, with dates. If your contract permits AI assistance, the record also shows the work stayed inside the agreement: the tools used are the tools declared.
If the work was not recorded, this dispute is the expensive way to learn the lesson, and the honest reply is narrower: send the drafts and files you have, say plainly what the process was, and start recording from the next job. The reply template below works for both cases; use the paragraph that matches your record, not the one you wish matched.
Template: the reply to a detector flag
With a record: "The score measures writing style, not process, so here is the process: [handover link]. It shows each step of the work, what the AI produced, the steps I did myself, and the sources behind it. Happy to walk through any step." Without a record: "The score measures style, not process. My process was: [two or three factual lines, with the drafts or files attached]. I am adding step-level records to future deliveries so this is checkable rather than arguable." Then stop. Do not debate the detector's percentage.
Worked example
The record the first template points at looks like this in public: https://zambo.dev/handover/508a46e2-8d6e-4099-bd12-7ae461c72c55 , a four-step job whose steps a recipient client can read in order. A detector cannot produce an object like this; that asymmetry is the reply.
Frequently asked questions
Should I run the work through a different detector to get a better score?
No. Shopping for a friendlier guess keeps the dispute about guesses. One record of the actual process outweighs any number of conflicting scores, and clients know the difference when they see both.
My contract says nothing about AI. Does the record still help?
Yes, because the client's real concern is usually undisclosed process, not AI itself. A record that shows the process, including your own steps, answers the concern directly and sets the expectation for future work.
What if the work really was mostly AI-generated within the contract?
Then the record is still the right thing to send. It shows the work was done as agreed, with your review steps visible. Concealing the process is the only move that turns a detector flag into a trust problem.
By Brennan Zambo, founder of Zambo.
Last verified: 2026-10-17.
Try a handover
A handover gives your client one proof link with verifiable receipts to review, then Accept or Flag.
try it: say 'use zambo to hand this over to <client>' in your ai