COCasinoOpsAI
Surveillance • Report Quality

Report Wording Consistency

Review surveillance report language for neutrality, attribution, scope, uncertainty, consistency, privacy, and readability—while preserving the original and requiring human source verification before approval.

Surveillance Review, Protection & Coverage Control SuiteCompare controls →
Authorize & scopeReview evidenceAssess coverageCorrect procedureAssure wording

Current workflow: Report Wording · Report quality. The suite supports restricted evidence handling and human review; it does not determine guilt, authorize surveillance expansion, or replace official source records and approvals.

How to use this tool

  1. Identify the report, audience, approved standard, author, reviewer, and classification.
  2. Paste the original text and run the configurable wording analysis.
  3. Review every flag in context and document property-specific terminology decisions.
  4. Create a source-checked revision, record material changes and limitations, then approve.
New unsaved draft
Writing safeguard: Consistency review improves clarity and neutrality but cannot verify whether a report is factually correct. Preserve the original report, confirm every changed sentence against source evidence, and never use automated wording changes to strengthen a conclusion beyond the available facts.

Report identity and writing standard

Define the report, author, reviewer, classification, purpose, and approved wording standard.

1

Original report text

Paste the working text. The analyzer flags wording patterns; it does not evaluate source truth.

2
Keep a separate controlled copy of the original. Avoid pasting information into an environment not authorized by your property.

Automated wording findings

Review each flag in context. A flagged phrase may be justified when directly supported and correctly attributed.

3
Flagged phrase / issueCategoryCountWhy review itPreferred approachReviewer status
Run the wording analyzer to create review findings.

Wording position

Calculated from the current text and findings.

Original words0Source-text word count
Flags0Phrases / structural issues
Long sentences0Over 35 words
Resolved0%Reviewer disposition rate
Review completion0%

Terminology and consistency decisions

Document property-specific wording choices so reviewers apply the same standard across reports.

4
Discouraged / inconsistent termPreferred wordingReason / evidence ruleApplies toRemove

Revised report and review control

Write the controlled revision, then record material changes, remaining limitations, and approval.

5

Quality checks

Wording approval still requires human source verification.

    Generated wording review

    Review findings, source-verification control, and approval position.

    Paste a report, analyze the wording, and generate the review record.
    Neutral reporting examples
    • Instead of “the dealer cheated,” write what the source shows and what procedure was not followed.
    • Instead of “obviously,” cite the camera, system record, document, or attributed statement.
    • Use “reported,” “verified,” “not independently verified,” “within the reviewed scope,” and “the available sources do not establish…” precisely.
    • Keep observation, interpretation, and management decision in separate sentences or sections.