What it is
Automation and oversight are not opposites. The right setup automates the production of an article and keeps a human in control of whether it publishes. AutoPublish's approval workflow is that control layer. When a connection or a content stream is set to require approval, generated articles don't publish on their own — they enter a review state and wait. A reviewer (you, a teammate, a client contact, a corporate brand owner) opens the article, reads it, leaves comments, and then approves it, rejects it, or sends it back for changes. Only an approved article publishes. This is what makes AutoPublish safe to use for agency client work, franchise systems with brand-claim rules, and any team where 'a person signed off on this' is a requirement, not a nicety.
Why it matters
Nothing publishes unreviewed
When approval is required, a generated article waits in a review state until a human approves it. Publishing without sign-off is structurally impossible.
Assign the right reviewer
Route articles to a specific reviewer — a teammate, a client contact, a corporate brand owner — so the person accountable for the content is the one signing off.
Comment and request changes
Reviewers leave comments and send articles back for revision, so feedback is captured in the workflow instead of scattered across email.
Built for client and brand sign-off
Agencies get client approval before publishing to client sites; franchise systems get corporate sign-off on brand claims. The checkpoint is the trust layer.
How it works
The approval workflow inserts a review-and-sign-off state between generation and publishing for any connection that requires it.
- 1
Require approval on a connection
Set a site or content stream to require approval. Generated articles for it will enter the review state instead of publishing automatically.
- 2
Articles enter review
A generated, quality-gated article lands in the review queue in a pending state, waiting for a reviewer rather than going live.
- 3
Assign a reviewer
Assign the article to the person responsible for signing off — a teammate, a client, or a brand owner.
- 4
Review, comment, decide
The reviewer reads the article, leaves comments, and approves it, rejects it, or requests changes. Rejected or returned articles can be revised and resubmitted.
- 5
Approved articles publish
Once approved, the article publishes to the connected CMS on schedule. Only approved articles ever go live.
What you can do with it
- Require human approval before publishing, per site or stream
- Hold generated articles in a pending review state
- Assign articles to a specific reviewer
- Leave comments and request changes on an article
- Approve, reject, or return an article for revision
- Resubmit revised articles for another review pass
- Combine with the 14-signal quality gate for layered checks
- Use for agency client sign-off and franchise brand control
Frequently asked questions
How is this different from the quality gate?
The 14-signal quality gate is an automated structural check — thin content, weak structure, missing links. The approval workflow is human judgment — a person reads the article and decides whether it publishes. They're layered: the gate runs first, then a human signs off.
Can I require approval for some sites but not others?
Yes. Approval is set per connection or content stream. You might require sign-off on client sites and franchise sites while letting your own blog publish directly.
Can a client or external reviewer approve content?
Yes. You can route articles to the person accountable for them, including client contacts and corporate brand owners — which is exactly what makes the workflow suitable for agency and franchise use.
What happens to a rejected article?
A rejected or returned article can be revised — edited or regenerated — and resubmitted for another review pass. It doesn't publish until a reviewer approves it.
Does requiring approval slow everything down?
Generation still runs automatically and in volume; only the publish step waits for sign-off. Reviewers work from finished, quality-gated drafts, so review is fast — and you can reserve approval for the streams that actually need it.
When AutoPublish is not the answer
We would rather you know now than sign up and churn. AutoPublish is not the right tool if any of these describe you:
- You need a few deeply original thought-leadership pieces — that is a job for a specialist writer with real lived experience, not a volume tool.
- You will not review AI output at all. The 14-signal quality gate is a safety net, not a replacement for editorial judgment.
- You want to publish thin content fast to game search. The quality gate is built specifically to stop that — you would be fighting your own tool.
- Your content needs licensed expertise — medical, legal, or financial advice — without a qualified expert reviewing it before publish.
- You need original news reporting or investigative journalism, which depends on primary sourcing AutoPublish does not do.
Related pages
Put approval workflow to work
Free tier with 3 credits. No credit card. Connect a CMS and publish your first article in under 10 minutes.