No AI tool is best for every thesis. Check that your rules permit it, that it comments on content, adds no text to your work, keeps your file out of AI training and ties each comment to a passage you can check. Esmond does the last four. Ask your advisor whether your rules permit it.
If your AI statement clearly doesn't cover what you describe elsewhere in your thesis, Esmond points it out.
Run these on any tool you consider, before you upload a draft. The sections below explain each one.
| Check | What to look for |
|---|---|
| Your rules | Your program, advisor and committee permit this kind of tool for this draft |
| What it adds | Comments only, with no new text in your document |
| What it reads for | Content, such as claims, evidence and consistency, as a separate job from language |
| Whether you can check it | Each comment points to a passage and says why |
| Your file | A clear answer on training, storage and deletion |
| Your field | Comments that follow the reasoning of your field |
| Who runs it | A named company, a contact address and a clear cost |
A hypothetical example of a commentYour research question asks why students leave the program, but your survey only records whether they left. Which question does your data answer?
A first comment on one part of your own draft, right away and without an account.
Get a free previewBoston University Libraries' checklist for students includes this line: “Understand your instructor or course expectations.” For a thesis, that means your program, your advisor and your committee. A tool can do everything else on this list and still be off limits for your work.
Can I get AI feedback on my thesis? goes through who decides, and Is it cheating to use AI feedback? quotes what misconduct rules say.
Some tools produce or reword text, and others only comment on it. Your rules may treat those differently, and so will your committee. Types of AI help for a thesis sets the kinds apart. Look at what you get back: if your own document returns with sentences changed, the tool has done more than comment.
A language checker can leave a weak argument untouched. To see what a tool reads for, ask what it would do with a conclusion that goes beyond your data, or with two chapters that contradict each other.
The University of Cincinnati's guide to evaluating AI asks: “Does the tool explain its output?” For a thesis, a useful comment points to a passage and says what the problem is, so you can open your draft and decide. A general remark about your argument gives you nothing to verify.
You stay responsible for what you submit. Boston University's checklist also says: “Ensure you can explain your work.” Check each comment against your data and your sources, and drop the ones that don't hold up.
A draft can contain participant data, unpublished results or material under an agreement, so read the privacy policy before you upload anything. University of Texas Libraries suggests asking: “Is there a way to opt out of including your uploaded content in the training corpus?” Cincinnati's guide asks the same thing another way: “Will your data be used to train future tools?”
Also ask how long the file is kept, who can open it and how you can have it deleted. Boston University's advice is short: “Avoid entering sensitive information.” Replace the names of participants before you upload.
What counts as a problem depends on the field. A significant result treated as proof matters in a psychology thesis, and a list of cases that are never weighed against each other matters in a law thesis. A tool that never asks about your field has to guess it. See whether the comments use the reasoning of your discipline or could apply to any paper.
Look for a company name, an address and a way to reach someone. University of Texas Libraries also asks: “How is this tool funded?” Be careful with what a maker says about itself. Cincinnati's guide warns: “Creators of AI tools will often release information as marketing for their tool, which can obscure vital information that helps evaluate reliability.” That goes for us too, so test the claims on this page against your own draft.
On cost, check whether you pay once or every month, and what happens when you stop. How much does it cost to have a thesis reviewed? compares the options.
Once your rules permit it, you can try a tool on a small part of your draft:
The checks are the same for each type of work. For a dissertation, ask how a tool compares one chapter with another. A capstone often applies what you learned to a practical problem, so see whether the tool notices when a recommendation goes beyond your material.
Esmond evaluates every assignment before you submit. It never writes it.
Esmond adds no text to your document. It comments on content without editing language. Comments appear beside the relevant passages, and feedback reflects your broad field and paper type. Uploaded texts are not used to train AI models, by Esmond or by its suppliers. Your source file is deleted as soon as your report is ready, and the report stays available for 90 days after your upload. It is run by Ramirez BV in Ghent, Belgium.
It doesn't know your school's rules, and the feedback is generated by AI and can contain errors. Esmond is an AI tool that doesn't write for you. If your course doesn't allow any AI tools, don't use Esmond for that work. If you're unsure, ask your instructor or advisor.
How Esmond works covers who sees your paper, Who is behind Esmond? names the company, the sample report shows what comes back, and the box at the end of this page shows the lowest amount.
No tool is best for every thesis, and we don't rank them. Esmond is the only one we can answer for. Run the seven checks on any tool you consider, starting with whether your rules permit it.
It can comment if you ask it to. Run the same checks: whether your rules permit it, what happens to your file, whether it adds text and whether you can verify what it says.
That is a separate job, and your rules may treat it separately. A tool that does both can change your text, so check what it returns.
It can comment on content without them. You remain responsible for those rules, so check your handbook and ask your advisor.
Read on November 5, 2026.
Get your paper evaluated before you submit