What these tools do genuinely well is the work around the writing. Outlining a structure, suggesting angles you had not considered, drafting a section you are stuck on, tightening something you wrote badly, generating variations of a headline, and turning a long piece into a short one. That is a substantial share of the total effort and none of it requires the tool to know anything you do not.
What they cannot supply is the thing that distinguishes your material: what you have actually seen. The specific number from a job you did, the mistake a customer made that you now warn people about, the reason the obvious answer is wrong in your market. A model has no access to any of that, and content without it is indistinguishable from every other article on the topic, which is precisely why it does not rank and does not persuade.
The practical method that works is to supply the substance and let the tool handle the shape. Talk through what you know, transcribe it, and use the model to organise and tighten. That preserves your knowledge and your voice while removing the part most owners find hardest, which is turning knowing something into a readable piece.
Verify anything factual, without exception. These tools produce confident, plausible, wrong statements, particularly about numbers, dates, regulations, and anything that changed recently. Publishing an incorrect figure with your name on it damages more than the article, and the checking takes less time than the correction.
Disclose where it matters and use judgement where it does not. Nobody expects a disclosure because you used a tool to tighten a paragraph. Material presented as your direct experience, that you did not have, is a different thing regardless of how it was produced.
There is a practical reason to care about this beyond quality, which is that the volume of generated material has risen sharply and readers have become better at recognising it. Content that reads as machine produced now carries a cost it did not carry two years ago, because it signals that nobody with expertise was involved. For a business whose entire advantage is knowing things a competitor does not, publishing material indistinguishable from anybody else's actively works against the thing you were trying to demonstrate.