The short answer
Developers get a migration record that connects the vendor notice to every affected application, owner, test, cost change, and customer-facing risk.
The decision standard is simple: preserve the source, state the limits, and make the next human check obvious. A useful article should reduce uncertainty without pretending that every unknown has been resolved.
What to examine
A retirement date is only the start of the story. Teams also need replacement behavior, endpoint parity, tool support, retention differences, evaluation results, rollout milestones, and a rollback plan.
Start with scope. Identify the product, account, audience, jurisdiction, data, and decision involved. Then separate what was directly observed from what a vendor, researcher, regulator, or commentator says. Record dates because AI products, access rules, and prices change quickly.
A replacement with similar names or examples may still differ in output, state handling, tools, limits, latency, or data controls.
A practical way to do it
- Inventory endpoints, model IDs, tools, prompts, state, and owners.
- Run a frozen evaluation set and compare quality, latency, cost, and failure behavior.
- Schedule staged cutover, monitoring, rollback, and removal of obsolete credentials or code.
Keep the worksheet or test record with the draft. If another editor cannot reproduce the check from the saved evidence, the article is not ready.
Editorial guardrail
Do not fill a missing fact with a plausible sentence. Mark it as unknown, find a stronger source, narrow the claim, or remove it. Commentary belongs in a clearly labeled paragraph after the reported facts, not inside them.
Primary-source reading list
These are starting points, not automatic support for every sentence. The publishing editor must open each cited page and confirm the claim it supports on the day of review.
Bottom line
Developers get a migration record that connects the vendor notice to every affected application, owner, test, cost change, and customer-facing risk.