Editorial and Review Policy
How Reconcile Locally researches, reviews, sources, and updates practical reconciliation guidance.
Try with sample files | View sample report
Problem statement
Reconciliation guidance affects financial review work, so public content must distinguish supported facts, practical workflow recommendations, product capabilities, and cases that still require professional judgment.
Claim review examples
| Line item | Amount |
|---|
| Export explicitly labels a refund | May describe it as a refund |
| Net payout is lower without support | Describe as amount difference |
| Several plausible matches exist | Keep as needs review |
How content is researched
- Platform-specific claims are checked against first-party documentation whenever it is available.
- Product behavior is checked against the current application, tests, sample fixtures, and exported report taxonomy.
- Public wording defaults to amount difference or needs review when the available evidence does not prove an exact cause.
- Comparison pages describe workflow differences without claiming feature-for-feature replacement.
Evidence used
- First-party documentation for payout, export, and status behavior.
- Product fixtures and tests used to verify current behavior.
- Visible sample reports and review states users can inspect before using the workspace.
Editorial review process
- Define the exact user question and intended audience.
- Check first-party documentation and current product behavior.
- Write practical guidance with explicit limits and review states.
- Verify links, examples, visible content, and structured data.
- Review material changes and update the visible review date.
Claims we avoid
- Guaranteed perfect matching or fully automatic reconciliation.
- Claims that an unexplained difference is definitely a fee, refund, fraud, or accounting error.
- Claims that Reconcile Locally replaces accounting software, professional advice, or bank feeds.
Editorial defaults
- Content must be useful without requiring signup.
- Examples must not contain real customer financial data.
- Pages state when manual review or another workflow remains necessary.
What readers should still verify
- Platform behavior and export formats can change, so time-sensitive details should be confirmed in first-party documentation.
- Editorial guidance does not replace a qualified accounting or tax professional.
Content review and sources
Written and reviewed by the Reconcile Locally product team. Last reviewed June 7, 2026.
Guidance is checked against current product behavior and first-party documentation where available. Reconciliation results still require human review.
Frequently asked questions
Who writes and reviews the guidance?
Guidance is maintained by the Reconcile Locally product team and reviewed against current product behavior and first-party documentation.
Does the content provide accounting advice?
No. It explains exported-file reconciliation workflows and product behavior, not accounting, tax, legal, or financial advice.