What should a reseller inspect before publishing a generated sample?
Sample review should examine generated content, grounding descriptions and disclosure risks together, because synthetic output alone does not establish suitable public distribution.
Review these points before placing a generated sample in a public catalogue, downloadable export or machine-readable endpoint.
- Confirm that delivered records are generated material. - Inspect free text for unexplained source-like fragments. - Check rare combinations of circumstances and identifiers. - Review how operational grounding is described. - Identify any retained source references or embedded metadata. - Inspect attachments as well as structured fields. - Record unresolved concerns and the publication decision.
The relevant question is not merely whether names have been replaced. A detailed exception narrative, distinctive sequence of events or embedded document property may require closer inspection even when the main records are generated. Review should consider the sample as a combined artefact rather than assessing each field in isolation.
A reseller can ask for an explanation of how business understanding informs generation and what review evidence accompanies the proposed release. That explanation should distinguish operational patterns from any underlying source material.
Generated output does not by itself guarantee anonymity, privacy compliance or regulatory approval. Scope grounding and disclosure-risk inspection to the intended distribution route, including whether a public endpoint makes the sample searchable or easily recombined with other material.
Build a publication decision from inspectable evidence rather than relying on the word synthetic.
- Audience:
- Licensed resellers
- Content type:
- Checklist
- Buyer question:
- How to evaluate it
Content release: r-a220eb6e099b243b
Related questions
- How can a scenario test whether an agent handles another worker's concurrent change?
- How can buyers check whether an agent understands changes rather than memorising wording?
- What should buyers inspect before trusting a generated change evaluation set?
- Which evaluation hooks expose retry and duplicate-processing failures?
- How should evaluation distinguish complete handling from a correct-looking final record?
- How can buyers evaluate correctness without requiring one exact action sequence?