Content
Burnish drafts against a tracked topic pool, holds every draft until you approve it, then paces publishing.
The other paces the publishing. They are deliberately separate.
Per cycle · what your plan writes
Per day · what may go live
Only you move a draft past the third.
The pool
A tracked pool beside the calendar — you see what is queued before anything exists.
The draft
A topic becomes a draft. Not live, not published, nowhere near your storefront.
Your approval
Nothing leaves the drafts view without you. What you decided is kept.
The schedule
Approved drafts go onto the calendar, paced inside your plan’s daily limit.
Each article aims at a question your products can’t win yet. Burnish writes, schedules and measures them. You oversee; you don’t operate.
Discovery finds the gap → Burnish writes the article → Visibility re-measures the win.
Won lights up as a tracked question you were absent from starts naming you — a correlational read, ~30 days after publishing.
Published articles whose tracked question now mentions your brand — a correlational read over a ~30-day window, not a claim the article caused it.
ChatGPT3
Perplexity2
Gemini2
Claude1
Grok1Build quality of your published articles — structure, answer schema, and topic coverage. This is how well-made they are, not whether they’re winning yet.
Three numbers other tools would quote here, and why Burnish does not have them.
Burnish reports no search positions. V1 has no Search Console.
None is attached to an article, and none is promised.
Answer-engine visibility overlaps SEO. It is not the same claim.
The free audit reads your store the way the assistants do. Whether you need articles at all is a question the reading answers.
