My client accused me of using AI. How do I respond?
Respond with the agreement and the record, in that order. Review the receipt and actual deliverable before accepting a handover.
The accusation usually carries one of three real concerns: that AI use broke the agreement, that the work was not really done by the professional they hired, or that they are paying human prices for unreviewed machine output. Each concern has a factual answer, and defensiveness answers none of them. The reply that works treats the accusation as a request for the record.
Start with the agreement. If AI assistance was permitted or disclosed, say so in one line and cite the term or the message. If the agreement was silent, do not pretend otherwise; move directly to the process. The record shows the division of labour with dates: the research steps, the draft steps, your rewrite and review steps, and the sources each output rested on, including any that were flagged unresolved. That is the substance of "I did the work": direction, judgement, and review, made visible.
Close by standing behind the deliverable in terms of the contract: the outcome, the standard, and the revisions you will make if a named requirement was missed. The template below keeps the order. And take the forward lesson the accusation is offering: disclose the process at delivery, with the record attached, and this conversation never starts.
Template: the reply to an AI-use accusation
Line 1 (agreement): "Our agreement [permits / does not restrict] AI assistance; the relevant term is [clause or message date]." Line 2 (process): "Here is the work record: [handover link]. It shows each step, what the AI produced, the steps I did myself, and the sources used." Line 3 (accountability): "I directed and reviewed the work and I stand behind it to the standard in the contract. If a specific requirement was missed, name it and I will fix that item." Then stop. No apology for the tool, no lecture about the industry.
Worked example
The record line 2 points at is shaped like the public handovers in this section, for example https://zambo.dev/handover/508a46e2-8d6e-4099-bd12-7ae461c72c55 : four steps, readable in order by the client making the accusation. A process that can be opened beats a process that can only be described.
Frequently asked questions
Should I disclose AI use before a client asks?
Yes, at delivery, with the record attached. Disclosure with evidence reads as professionalism; disclosure extracted by an accusation reads as concealment, even when the underlying use was entirely proper.
The contract forbids AI and I used it. Does the record help or hurt?
That is a contract problem, not a records problem, and it needs honest handling and likely legal advice. The record will show the process accurately, which is all the more reason the agreement and the process should have matched from the start.
What if there is no record of the work?
Answer with what exists: drafts, files, messages, and a plain account of the process. Then change the default: deliver recorded work with the process attached, so the next accusation is answered by a link.
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