Skip to main content

Documentation Index

Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://agenticadvertisingorg-changeset-release-main.mintlify.app/llms.txt

Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

AgenticAdvertising.org uses AI extensively to write content, generate imagery, ship code, and run operations. This page names every surface where that happens, the models behind it, and how to request human review.

​
What’s AI-authored

These surfaces are written primarily by an AI agent operated by AAO, with human editorial oversight:
  • Addie — AAO’s teaching assistant and chat agent. All Addie chat responses are AI-generated.
  • Sage — the AdCP protocol explainer agent. Protocol Q&A in the docs chat is answered by Sage.
  • The Prompt — our biweekly newsletter, authored in first person as Addie. The Prompt is editorial and is also a marketing surface for AAO; read it as both.
  • The Build — our triweekly technical newsletter, authored by Sage.
  • Member portraits — graphic-novel-style illustrations for members are AI-generated.
  • Certification grading — Addie grades the free Basics track against a fixed rubric of 3–5 required demonstrations per module, and also grades the paid Practitioner and Specialist tracks. AAO is both the issuer and the grader of these credentials; we disclose this conflict rather than deny it, and human review of any grading decision is available on request (see below).

​
What’s AI-assisted

Most of the rest of AAO’s public surface is built with AI coding assistants, reviewed by humans before publishing. This includes:
  • The protocol schemas and documentation (this site)
  • The open-source reference implementations
  • The admin tools operated by AAO staff
  • Most public-facing code in the adcontextprotocol organization
We don’t mark individual paragraphs or pull requests as AI-assisted — the default is that AI tools were involved.

​
Model and provider disclosure

  • Addie and Sage run on Anthropic Claude models.
  • Image generation (member portraits, illustrations) uses Google Gemini image models.
  • Protocol development uses Claude Code and other agentic development tools.

​
Data handling

  • Addie and Sage chat — conversations are logged to improve teaching quality and to allow appeals on grading decisions. Logs are retained by AAO and not used by model providers for training. EU/UK residents: chat inputs are processed on our behalf by Anthropic; see our privacy policy for the current data-processor chain and transfer mechanism.
  • Grading decisions — the required-demonstrations, the Addie interaction that produced the credit, and the resulting assessment are retained so that a learner (or a regulator) can reconstruct the decision.
  • Member portraits — AI-generated images are produced from member-provided inputs; the prompt and generated image are retained on the member’s profile.

​
Human review

You can request human review on any AI-generated surface. Certification grading appeals SLA. Because AAO is both the issuer and the AI grader of its certifications, every grading appeal gets a documented human-review path:
  • Acknowledgement: 72 hours from receipt at help@agenticadvertising.org.
  • Decision: 10 business days from acknowledgement, by an AAO staff reviewer who did not participate in the original grading.
  • Outcome on upheld appeals: the credential is granted (if the appeal is for a denied attempt) or the assessment fee is refunded (if the appeal is for a graded attempt the learner does not want re-credentialed).
  • Escalation: appeals that the staff reviewer cannot resolve are escalated to the AAO certification committee, which meets monthly.
  • Annual transparency report: AAO publishes appeals volume, upheld rate, and median time-to-decision once per year as part of the AGM materials. The first report covers the period ending 2027-04.
To file a grading appeal, email help@agenticadvertising.org with your learner ID, the module or assessment in question, and the specific finding you are contesting. Other AI-surface review paths:
  • Content corrections — factual errors in Addie’s teaching, Sage’s protocol explanations, or any AI-authored content can be reported via GitHub issues or Slack. Target turnaround is five business days.
  • Protocol guidance — Sage is not a substitute for legal or regulatory advice. For compliance-sensitive questions, consult qualified counsel.

​
Content provenance (C2PA)

Every AI-generated image AAO publishes carries an embedded C2PA manifest signed by AAO:
  • Member portraits — also carry a visible “AI” badge in the bottom-right corner (CA SB 942 visible-disclosure path).
  • Newsletter cover art — The Prompt and The Build covers, including the copies that ship in subscriber email and render as OpenGraph share cards.
  • Perspective article hero images — every editorial illustration attached to a published perspective.
  • Docs walkthrough and concept illustrations — the panel PNGs embedded throughout this site’s walkthroughs and concept explainers.
The manifest identifies Google Gemini as the generating software agent, marks the asset as trainedAlgorithmicMedia per the IPTC digital-source-type vocabulary, and includes a timestamp plus a SHA-256 of the generation prompt (not the prompt itself — portraits are generated from member-provided descriptions we do not want to republish). AAO signs with a self-signed P-256 certificate held in production secrets. CAI trust-list inclusion is a future step; today, public verifiers will show the signature as cryptographically valid but flag “issuer not on trust list.” Verify any AAO image at contentcredentials.org/verify by uploading the file or pasting its URL. For editorial illustrations and docs storyboards where a visible mark would undermine the graphic-novel aesthetic, the C2PA manifest is the sole disclosure surface. CA SB 942’s visible-disclosure rule targets upstream generative-AI providers rather than downstream publishers, so this placement is defensible for AAO — but it is a deliberate choice, not an oversight. If you find an AAO-generated image that does not carry a manifest, please open an issue — we treat missing provenance as a bug.

​
Regulatory posture

This disclosure is informed by the FTC Endorsement Guides (2023), EU AI Act Art 50, and California SB 942. It has not been reviewed by outside counsel.
  • EU AI Act Art 50(2) and CA SB 942 require machine-readable provenance on AI-generated images and video — see the content provenance section above for how we satisfy this.
  • FTC Endorsement Guides apply to endorsements and testimonials for compensation. They are not activated by general AI authorship; we call them out here for completeness, not because we claim they are satisfied by this page alone.
If you believe a specific AI surface falls short of an applicable standard, let us know.

​
Institutional conflicts

AI authorship and evaluation by AAO intersect with AAO’s broader governance in ways readers should know:
  • AAO is both the issuer and the grader of its certifications (Addie evaluates coursework and grants credentials AAO sells).
  • AAO’s founder’s other company (Scope3) contributed funding and foundational IP — see the FAQ entry for the full relationship.
The governance framework, board composition, and recusal rules are set out in CHARTER.md, with the authoritative board list and funding disclosures at agenticadvertising.org/governance.
Material changes to how AI is used at AAO will be reflected on this page.