Inspect
Scan the text for conservative Unicode hygiene issues and recurring stylistic signals.
Explainable · privacy-aware · free to analyze
Claude Watermark Detector
Scan for suspicious Unicode artifacts and Claude-style writing signals with an explainable report.
Paste a passage to inspect its language, structure, and invisible Unicode characters. The tool highlights tendencies found in Claude and other model-assisted writing, including repeated transitions, balanced sentences, generic conclusions, excessive qualification, and uniform cadence.
Writing workbench
Inspect first. Revise with context.
0 words · 0 / 25,000 characters
Explainable report
Local analysis
Your evidence appears here
Get an overlap score, confidence level, matched excerpts, rhythm metrics, and a separate Unicode hygiene report.
Exact phrases, not a black-box verdict
Unicode kept separate from style
Short-sample confidence warning
Important: Experimental style analysis—not an official Anthropic detector. Scores describe pattern overlap, not authorship probability. Do not use this result to accuse, grade, hire, or discipline anyone.
A careful workflow
From pattern review to careful revision
A useful report should explain what it found. It should also preserve your authority over every change.
Understand
Review highlighted examples and see why each pattern affected the overlap score.
Revise
Make targeted edits or use FaddyAI AI Humanizer, then verify the result yourself.
Human oversight
Humanize the draft without losing control
The optional revision stage uses FaddyAI’s existing AI Humanizer to improve variation, clarity, and flow while preserving technical terms and the central argument.
Check every factual claim and numerical value
Verify quotations, sources, and citation placement
Restore discipline-specific terminology where needed
Follow applicable AI disclosure and integrity rules
Learn before you label
Evidence-based guides
Claude writing patterns: what they can and cannot tell you
Separate useful editing signals from unsupported authorship claims.
Read guideHow AI writing detectors work—and why false positives happen
Understand scores, thresholds, domain shift, and review limits.
Read guideA responsible workflow for revising AI-assisted academic drafts
Protect citations, meaning, disclosure, and your own voice.
Read guideClaude Watermark Detector: Frequently Asked Questions
No. It identifies patterns that may occur in Claude and other AI-assisted writing, but those patterns are not unique to any model. Treat the result as an editing signal, not an authorship determination.
The conservative cleanup normalizes unusual spaces and removes a small set of verifiable invisible Unicode characters. Optional academic revision changes wording and sentence structure, so compare the revision with the original before using it.
No tool can guarantee that outcome. Third-party detectors use different methods, change over time, and can produce both false positives and false negatives.
It can support editing when its use complies with institutional rules. Writers remain responsible for original analysis, accurate citations, disclosure requirements, and the final submitted work.
As seen on
🚀Product Hunt
📰TechCrunch
YHackerNews
🛠️FutureTools
🤖TheresAnAIForThat
🚀Product Hunt
📰TechCrunch
YHackerNews
🛠️FutureTools
🤖TheresAnAIForThat
🚀Product Hunt
📰TechCrunch
YHackerNews
🛠️FutureTools
🤖TheresAnAIForThat