Structured Content Review

Your AI Writes Content. Your Reviewers Fix It. Nothing Gets Remembered.

Typescape turns review feedback into persistent, structured rules that your AI agents actually consume. Every correction compounds. Every review makes the next draft better.

Start free — 15 reviews/month See the workflow

No credit card. Full CLI, API, and MCP access on every plan.

The Problem

AI Changed How Content Gets Made. Nothing Changed How It Gets Reviewed.

The bottleneck moved from production to review. Your tools didn't.

The Cold Start Problem

Every new AI session starts from zero. Every new writer starts from zero. Your brand voice doc sits in a folder nobody opens. The AI has no memory of what your reviewer wanted last week.

The Feedback Black Hole

Your reviewer catches the same issues every time. Too formal here. Wrong tone there. They leave comments in Google Docs. The writer fixes the draft. Next week, same issues. The comments got resolved. The knowledge evaporated.

No Infrastructure for Quality

Developers have CI/CD. Designers have design systems. Your content team has… a Google Doc and hope. There's no quality gate, no persistent standards, no system that learns from review.

How It Works

Review That Compounds

Four steps. Each one feeds the next. The third review is faster than the first because the system remembers what your reviewer taught it.

1

Submit for Review

Upload a document, pull from your repo, or paste markdown. Share a magic link with reviewers. They open it and start — no account needed.

2

Reviewers Find Issues

Every finding is anchored to a specific block, carries a severity (blocking, needs-changes, suggestion), and persists as structured data. Not a comment thread. A finding.

3

Agents Consume the Export

Export the review as schema-versioned JSON. Feed it to your AI agent via the API, CLI, or MCP. The agent applies the findings and creates the next revision. No copy-paste. No interpretation.

4

Feedback Becomes Rules

Spot a pattern? Promote it to a published rule. Future content is automatically checked. The 47th time you give the same note is the last time.

The compounding effect: After three months, your rule library encodes what took years to accumulate as tribal knowledge. New hires inherit it on day one. New AI sessions start with it loaded. Your reviewer stops catching the same issues and starts catching the ones that matter.

Agent-Native

Works with the Tools Your Team Already Uses

Your pipeline is automated except one step: human review. That step should be an API call, not a Google Doc.

CLI

Create reviews, export findings, and manage rules from your terminal. Composable in scripts. First-class JSON output. Fits into any CI pipeline.

MCP

Model Context Protocol integration for Claude Code, Cursor, and other AI coding agents. Your agent creates reviews and consumes feedback natively.

REST API

The canonical contract. Schema-versioned, idempotent, stable envelopes. Build custom integrations, webhooks, and automated pipelines.

The Shift

Stop Giving the Same Feedback Twice

Before Typescape

  • × 45 minutes per review. Same corrections every week.
  • × Comments vanish when resolved. Knowledge evaporates.
  • × Brand voice drifts with every writer and every AI session.
  • × New hires get “read these 12 articles and match the tone.”
  • × The reviewer is the bottleneck. Thankless, repetitive, stuck.
  • × Organizational knowledge lives in people's heads.

After Typescape

  • ✓ 10 minutes per review. Recurring issues caught automatically.
  • ✓ Feedback compounds as rules. Nothing disappears.
  • ✓ Voice enforced from reviewer behavior, not a PDF nobody reads.
  • ✓ New hires get 47 rules that encode your voice on day one.
  • ✓ The reviewer becomes the most strategic person on the team.
  • ✓ Knowledge is structured, exportable, machine-readable.

Who It’s For

You Know What Good Content Looks Like. Now There’s a System to Enforce It.

Content Ops Leads

You're reviewing 40 AI drafts a week. Every one needs the same corrections. You've spent more time editing than the AI spent generating. That's backwards.

Technical Writing Teams

Your docs live in Git. Your reviewers don't. So you copy-paste into Google Docs, lose all the structure, and manually carry feedback back. There has to be a better way.

Agency Founders

Client voice profiles that don't compound. You lost a client because the content “stopped sounding like us” after month 3. The rules were in your head. They should be in a system.

AI Workflow Builders

Your entire pipeline is automated except one step: human review. That step should be an API call with structured output, not a Slack thread with thumbs-up reactions.

Pricing

Start Free. Scale When You’re Ready.

Priced per review session, not per seat. Unlimited reviewers on every plan.

Free

$0

15 reviews/month

  • Unlimited reviewers
  • Magic link sharing
  • Structured JSON export
  • CLI + MCP + API access
Get Started
Most Popular

Pro

$79/mo

100 reviews/month

  • Everything in Free
  • 1 rules workspace
  • Rule publishing & releases
  • Revision lineage
  • Repository integrations
Start Free Trial

Scale

$249/mo

500 reviews/month

  • Everything in Pro
  • 5 rules workspaces
  • Multi-tenant isolation
  • Team member management
  • Priority support
Start Free Trial

Done for You

Want Someone to Handle the Whole Thing?

We also run a managed AI visibility service for brands that need to show up when people ask AI for recommendations. We audit how AI models see your brand, build multi-channel authority, and make you harder to ignore. Same team, different engagement.

Talk to us

FAQ

Common Questions

How is this different from Google Docs comments?
Google Docs comments disappear when resolved. No structured export. No severity classification. No block-level anchoring that survives edits. No rules that carry forward. Typescape produces structured data machines can act on. Google Docs produces conversations humans forget.
Can't I just write better prompts?
Better prompts help one session. Typescape compounds across all sessions, all writers, all tools. The problem isn't the prompt. It's that prompts don't have memory. Your reviewer catches “too formal” this week. Without Typescape, they'll catch it again next week. With Typescape, that feedback becomes a rule your AI loads before it starts writing.
Is this an AI content detector?
The opposite. AI detectors ask “is this AI?” We ask “is this good?” Detection is a dead end. The actual need is quality review — does this match your voice, your standards, your domain rules? That's what Typescape does.
Do reviewers need accounts?
No. Magic links with one-time email verification. Reviewers click a link and start reviewing. No signup, no install, no training. Time to first comment: under 60 seconds.
How is this different from Grammarly or Writer?
Grammarly enforces grammar rules. Writer enforces preset style heuristics. Typescape captures your reviewers' judgment and makes it reusable. The rules come from your team's actual feedback, not from an algorithm. That's the difference between a linter and organizational memory.
We already have a brand style guide.
A style guide is a document. Typescape is infrastructure. Your guide tells people what to do. Typescape verifies that they did it — and learns what “good” actually means from your reviewers' behavior, not from a document nobody reads.
Another tool in the stack?
Typescape replaces the Google Docs + Slack + email review mess, not adds to it. One surface for review, one export format, one place where your standards live. The 6-tool stack isn't something anyone chose. It accumulated. Typescape is what it wants to consolidate into.

Your Review Feedback Is the Most Valuable Thing Your Team Produces. Stop Losing It.

Start free — 15 reviews/month