Respond to the specific detail, not a general apology
The original never touched anything the reviewer actually described. It now names the detail they spelled out before stating the fact.
The real reader of a public review reply is your next customer. We help you reply with specifics and restraint: acknowledge the exact thing they said, state what you can do, and give a next step the public can see. Actions taken, remedies, and findings are yours to supply, never ours to invent.
We pin down the specific fact raised, assemble the actions you can actually deliver, and flag the progress and remedies worth verifying.
SAMPLE OUTPUT
This is the complete output for the source text in the demo above: a reply quality score, itemised reasoning, the items to verify against what actually happened, and the drafted reply. It is a demonstration, not a customer case.
The original never touched anything the reviewer actually described. It now names the detail they spelled out before stating the fact.
“Perhaps you used it incorrectly” turns explanation into blame. The sentence is deleted and replaced by an undefensive statement of position.
“Assigned a specialist” and “as soon as possible” had no basis and committed to a timeline. They become a slot to confirm and a channel you can state publicly.
# Reply draft Thank you for spelling out [THE SPECIFIC DETAIL: which visit, which step]. **On what you raised**: [One sentence stating the fact — no defence, no speculation about cause] **On our side**: [One action you can actually take and have confirmed] **Next step**: if you are willing, reach us through [CHANNEL] and we will [HANDLING YOU CAN STATE PUBLICLY]. **To confirm**: whether a specialist has been assigned, and whether any remedy can be offered — neither is asserted here; add them from the actual situation before posting.
WHAT IT DOES
They wrote “waited three days for a reply” — answer that, not a generic complaint nobody made.
An action not taken must not read as taken. Unstated remedies stay as slots for you to confirm before posting.
“You may have used it incorrectly” is read by everyone watching. State your position without contesting their experience.
WHY IT IS WORTH DOING
Prospects reading a bad review are assessing whether you handle things well, not who is right.
Claim “a specialist is on it” when nobody is, and the reviewer returns with an update that costs more than silence.
One hint that the customer was at fault destroys whatever goodwill the reply earned, and cannot be retracted.
Note: how a public reply lands depends on your industry, the platform's rules, and what you actually did; there is no general research result for an optimal reply template. This site works on wording and structure only, and gives no legal or public relations advice.
DRAFTING DEMO
Dear customer, thank you for your review. We deeply apologise for your unpleasant experience. Our product has always been of excellent quality and is loved by users, so perhaps you used it incorrectly. We have assigned a specialist to follow up and will resolve it as soon as possible. Please understand, and we hope to see you again.
# Reply draft Thank you for spelling out [THE SPECIFIC DETAIL: which visit, which step]. **On what you raised**: [One sentence stating the fact — no defence, no speculation about cause] **On our side**: [One action you can actually take and have confirmed] **Next step**: if you are willing, reach us through [CHANNEL] and we will [HANDLING YOU CAN STATE PUBLICLY]. **To confirm**: whether a specialist has been assigned, and whether any remedy can be offered — neither is asserted here; add them from the actual situation before posting.
Demo sample: a general apology becomes a response to the specific detail, the hint that the customer misused the product is gone, and the unbacked “specialist assigned” and “as soon as possible” are replaced by slots. Paste your review to get your version (sign-in required; one credit per run).
WHY YOU CAN TRUST IT
“Assigned a specialist”, “investigated”, “fixed”, “compensated” become [TO CONFIRM] slots rather than plausible progress.
“As soon as possible”, “within 24 hours”, “next week” are removed unless your material states them as fact you may publish.
No hint that the reviewer misused the product or misunderstood. Stating a position is fine; denying their experience is not.
Submitted text is used for this single AI request and is not intentionally persisted. See the Privacy Policy.
FAQ
No. Actions taken, findings, and remedies are your actual handling. This site leaves a [TO CONFIRM] slot instead.
We advise against it and will not write it for you. A public date is read as a commitment, so “soon” or “next week” appears only when your material authorises it.
Yes, briefly. Acknowledge the specific detail they mentioned, and skip the marketing, the upsell, and any invented offer.
One credit per run, usually done in seconds, returning the draft, the reasoning, and items to verify.
No. Credits never expire — whatever you do not use carries over to the next cycle instead of resetting.
Not yet. Each run processes one document and consumes one credit; there is no bulk upload or API today. Email us with your use case and we will assess it.
Not intentionally. Text is used for this single AI request only. See the Privacy Policy.
App store reviews, map and platform ratings, e-commerce feedback, social comments — any public review that deserves a public reply.
SIMPLE PRICING
For an occasional publishing cadence, with a focused monthly credit allocation.
For frequent publishers who iterate on content continuously.
Our largest monthly credit allocation, for the heaviest continuous usage.
Credits never expire: unused credits carry over instead of resetting. Credits apply to this site only and are not shared with other sites.
Prices shown are USD baselines; final currency, taxes, and discounts are determined by Paddle for the checkout location.