WatermarkRemoverPro

For grant and bid writers under AI disclosure rules

Funders and procurement authorities have started attaching AI-use declarations to submissions. The risk is rarely deliberate concealment. It is a bid assembled from many contributors where nobody is certain what went through what.

The multi-author problem

A bid is stitched together from a subject lead’s notes, a partner’s boilerplate, last year’s successful submission and a compliance annex. Any of those may have passed through an assisted drafting tool without the bid manager knowing.

Signing a declaration you cannot substantiate is the actual exposure. Checking before filing turns an unknown into either a clean record or a specific passage to ask a colleague about.

Keeping a defensible record

The value of a dated report here is not that it proves the submission is human-written, because it cannot, and it says so. The value is that it evidences due diligence: on this date, this exact file, this test was run, these keys were tested, and this is what it found.

Because the report carries a SHA-256 of the file, it is tied to the version you actually submitted rather than to a draft.

Fitting it into a submission workflow

Pro batch upload handles a full annex set in one pass. If your bid pipeline is automated, the JSON API and MCP server let a check run as a pre-submission gate, so provenance is disclosed before handoff rather than discovered after.

Wherever this page describes a result: a detected mark is not proof of authorship, and an absent mark is not proof of human authorship. WatermarkRemoverPro's on-device rewrite can reduce detectable evidence but cannot guarantee defeating a vendor's undisclosed watermark, on any tier.

Answers, in full

Questions people actually ask

Does a clean check satisfy a funder’s declaration?
That depends entirely on the funder’s wording, and you should read it rather than assume. Most declarations ask what you did, not what a tool concluded. A dated record of the check you ran supports a declaration; it does not replace one.
Can this run inside our submission pipeline?
Yes. The API is documented in OpenAPI and metered per 1,000 words, and the MCP server exposes the same capability to an agent assembling the submission.