How a Tool Brief review gets written
- Pick the question, not the tool. Reviews start from a buyer question — "best combi drill for decking", "best impact driver for an electrician" — not from a press release.
- Pull the manufacturer specification first. Torque, chuck size, weight, capacity in wood/steel/masonry, battery platform. We quote the manufacturer's UK figure and link back to the source.
- Find a named independent reviewer test. UK reviewers we trust: Which? (full comparison is paywalled but methodology is public), Farmers Weekly, dedicated trade sites such as greengaffer.co.uk and DIY Garden. We cite the test, the method, and the date.
- Cross-check UK retailer prices and stock. Where the tool is available at UK retailers, we confirm stock and quote a current indicative price from our price watch.
- Write the verdict. The verdict summarises the answer to the buyer question. It cites the evidence behind it. It names the cases where the tool is not the right answer.
Hands-on versus desk research
At present, Tool Brief reviews combine manufacturer specifications, named independent reviewer tests, and UK price/stock data. We do not currently have a workshop-grade bench-test rig. Where a verdict rests on hands-on experience, we say so. Where it rests on desk research, we say that too. The full method is on the how we test page.
Supplied versus purchased
- Default rule: we do not accept review units from manufacturers. Where a tool has been purchased by Tool Brief, the article says so.
- Exception: where a manufacturer offers a long-term loan to UK trade press under their UK press programme (Bosch UK press fleet, Makita UK press fleet, etc.), we may accept a unit on loan. Where we do, the article states: "Review unit supplied on loan by [brand] UK press fleet." Loaned units are returned.
- Never accepted: payment, gifts, hospitality, trips, or anything else that could be perceived as influencing the verdict.
What we cite
Every claim of fact in a Tool Brief review is sourced. Sources fall into four tiers, listed in order of trust:
- Independent reviewer test with named method. (Farmers Weekly head-to-head, Which? comparison, dedicated trade site.) Quoted with attribution and date.
- Manufacturer UK specification. Quoted as such. Labelled "manufacturer claim" where the figure is a real-world runtime or performance number rather than a laboratory spec.
- UK retailer listing. Used for stock, price and SKU variants. Flagged where the listing contradicts the manufacturer spec (an honest spec conflict).
- User reports. Forums, social posts, customer reviews. Used only to corroborate a known issue or pattern, never as primary evidence. Quoted with platform and date.
Scoring
Tool Brief does not currently use a numeric star score on reviews. We use four verdict stamps:
- Buy — this is the right answer for the buyer question it answers.
- Consider — it does the job, with named trade-offs.
- Wait — wait for a price drop, a successor launch, or a competitor to ship.
- Avoid — we would not recommend it.
Updates and revisions
If a reviewed tool gets a meaningful hardware revision, a UK recall, a successor model, or a step-change in price, we update the review. The "Last updated" date at the top of the article is the canonical timestamp. Material changes are logged in the corrections policy.
Conflicts of interest
Tool Brief has no commercial relationships with the manufacturers covered in our reviews beyond the affiliate links disclosed on the affiliate disclosure page. Affiliate relationships do not affect verdicts. If we are ever wrong, the corrections page is the place that gets updated first.