I checked 11 AI tools' own pages against each other. Six of them contradict themselves.
A study of vendor self-consistency, taken from the source URLs published on CreatorStack. Every claim below is checkable against the vendor's own pages.
Why this exists
I maintain a small directory of AI tools for content creators. The rule the site is built on is simple: every fact carries the URL it came from, and anything that cannot be traced goes in a published list of unverified items instead.
That rule produced an unexpected side effect. When you check a vendor's pricing page, help centre and terms against each other rather than reading any one of them, you find that a surprising number of vendors disagree with themselves — about their own prices, their own storage limits, and what you are actually allowed to do with what you make.
This post collects those disagreements. It is not a review of any of these products, and none of them has been tested hands-on.
The findings
1. Runway — its own storage figure differs by 5× between two pages
| Source | What it says |
|---|---|
runwayml.com/pricing (Pro tier) |
100GB storage |
Pro help article on help.runwayml.com |
500GB storage |
Both pages were fetched on the same day. The conflicting figure was left out of the directory entry rather than picked, because there is no way to tell which one is current.
Runway's yearly discount is also labelled two different ways: the server HTML says "Yearly -20% off", while the rendered page says "2 months free". Those are not the same discount. Only the actual prices and the "Save $X/year" figures were used.
2. Suno — its help articles disagree on whether you may use your songs commercially
| Source | What it says |
|---|---|
| Help article 2410177 (2025-12-17) | Songs generated during a subscription may be used commercially |
| Help article 9601665 (2026-09-03) and the Terms | Songs downloaded during a subscription may be used commercially |
Generated and downloaded are not the same set of songs. The directory entry follows the Terms, because the Terms are the contract.
Separately, Suno's homepage FAQ still says Pro gives "500 songs a month", calls v5.5 the best model, and lists 8-minute uploads — while the pricing page shows v6 and uploads up to 30 minutes. The FAQ is stale; the pricing page is current.
3. HeyGen — the Terms and the FAQ disagree on free-tier commercial use
| Source | What it says |
|---|---|
| HeyGen's FAQ | Free-tier output may be used commercially |
| HeyGen's Terms | Free output is limited to personal, non-commercial evaluation |
A creator who reads only the FAQ and then publishes a free-tier video has a licensing problem they did not know about.
HeyGen also lists a different monthly free-video count on two of its own pages.
4. Ideogram — the pricing FAQ and the help docs disagree on who can generate and delete images
| Source | What it says |
|---|---|
ideogram.ai/pricing FAQ |
Only Plus and Pro can generate images, and only Plus and Pro can delete them |
docs.ideogram.ai |
Plus, Pro, Team and Enterprise images are private by default |
Whether Team and Enterprise can delete images could not be confirmed from either page, so that detail was left out of the directory entry entirely.
5. CapCut — its own pages disagree on how many videos the free tier allows
| Source | What it says |
|---|---|
| CapCut pricing page | 3 videos per month on free |
| CapCut help centre | 1 to 3 videos per month, depending on region |
This one could not be resolved at all. It is recorded as an open question in the directory entry.
6. Descript and Canva — not self-contradictory, but consistently misreported by third parties
Not every finding is a vendor contradicting itself. Some are vendors being contradicted by review sites, which is a different failure.
For Descript, several review sites still carry a one-week approval window for its affiliate programme; the programme's own page says approval may take up to 30 days, and lists a structure of 15% for the first 12 months plus a $25 one-time fee per new conversion — not the flat $25 many roundups repeat.
For Canva, third-party sites quote Pro at $14.99/month and $12.99/month. Canva's own pricing page says $18/month, or $144/year. Where a third-party figure could not be found on the vendor's own page at all, it was listed as unverified rather than repeated.
What I did with findings like these
Two rules, applied consistently:
- When a vendor contradicts itself, the conflicting figure does not go into the facts. It goes into a published gaps list, with the contradiction described. Picking the more convenient number would have made the entry look tidier and be less true.
- When a third party contradicts the vendor, the vendor wins unless the third party's figure can be confirmed. Third-party scores are ignored outright — this directory does not assign ratings, and it does not republish anyone else's.
Across the 11 entries currently published, that produced a list of dozens of unverified items — logged-in prices, non-US pricing, features behind a sign-in wall, and the contradictions above.
The pattern worth taking away
These are not obscure products. They are some of the most-used tools in the category, and the disagreements are on their own pages, on the same day, about prices, storage and licensing — the three things a buyer most needs to get right.
Two practical implications for anyone choosing a tool:
- Read the terms, not the FAQ. In the Suno and HeyGen cases the FAQ was the more generous document and the Terms were the binding one.
- Check the pricing page against the help centre. Where they disagree, the help centre is often the stale one — but not always, which is the annoying part.
And one implication for anyone publishing in this category: you do not need hands-on testing to add something a summary cannot. You need to read more than one page.
Full entries, each with its sourced facts, its gaps list and the date it was last checked: creatorstack-3yf.pages.dev. No tool listed there has been tested hands-on, which is why none of them carries a rating.