A content score is not a point of view

I don’t want a content score telling me whether my opinion is good.

Surfer gives you a content score, Jasper tries to model your brand voice, and Semrush suggests topics. They can organise a workflow, but I can’t see how any of that tells me which argument your buyers are tired of hearing or which bit of conventional advice is rubbish for your market.

For the kind of short B2B SaaS writing I care about, I’d open Claude or Codex with a rough opinion, the audience, and the claims I need to check. Then I’d push against whatever came back until it kept the awkward detail instead of smoothing it away. A score-led workflow doesn’t give me that kind of control.

I’d build a few reusable skills of my own for content research, SEM research and voice rules. If a post needs an image or video, I’d make one for that too. Then I’d send the finished piece to a CMS I can stand using and have it publish on schedule. I’d expect better posts from that than from a standalone writing tool because I can change the research or the rules as soon as they’re getting in the way.

That does require having an opinion in the first place. The assistant cannot supply a client story you haven’t told it or decide which product annoyed you in real use. Feed it generic notes and you’ll get generic copy, however nice the interface is.

I can see why the packaged tools were attractive when AI writing was new. Now, for a small team, they look increasingly like the Grammarly of B2B content marketing. They tidy the surface while the interesting decision stays with the writer. For a piece of writing, I want control over the argument, not another dial to turn green.