How should a non-expert read an AI-detection report?

How should a non-expert read an AI-detection report?

I am thinking about tools that check pasted text or a document and then return a report with a score, sentence highlights, reliability notes, and limitations.

The part that worries me is interpretation. A single score can look more certain than it really is. If the report says some sentences have AI-like patterns, that still does not prove who wrote the text, whether there was plagiarism, or whether someone did anything wrong.

I am working on a related text/document reporting workflow, so I am trying to make the report wording less easy to misuse. No link or service recommendation is needed here.

For a general user, what would you want the report to show before you trusted it as useful context?

- sample length and document type
- sentence-level highlights instead of only one number
- a clear false-positive and false-negative warning
- whether a fallback or lower-reliability result was used
- limits on using the result for school, work, legal, or disciplinary decisions
- plain language that says the report is a review signal, not proof

Would you put those caveats next to the score, or in a separate explanation section so the main report stays readable?