Treat an unused-asset report as evidence that a particular check did not find a use within its inspected scope. Before removing files, review other editions, editable sources, and retained production history. A file absent from the current export may still be needed to rebuild the book or support an accepted illustration's source record.
Identify what the report inspected
Record the project, file version, and search scope used by the check. It may inspect one manuscript, a release folder, or a set of explicit asset references. Do not assume it examined every editable source and alternative format unless that coverage is established.
Read how the tool identifies a reference and note relevant limitations. A report based on direct file paths may answer a different question from a check of embedded resources. Keep the interpretation tied to the actual method rather than treating the word unused as a universal description of the file.
Separate release assets from working dependencies
Identify whether the reported file is intended for the final publication package or for continued editing. A layered source image may not appear directly in the exported book because the layout uses a flattened version. Removing it can still reduce the project's ability to make a later correction.
Keep the relationship between the source and export visible. Use stable asset records or an inventory where appropriate so the project does not depend on a reviewer recognizing similar filenames. The cleanup decision should account for the role of the file, not only whether it is visible on a published page.
Check other editions and accepted alternatives
Review whether another format or language edition uses the asset. A print-only scan of references cannot establish whether an ebook layout or a translated illustration depends on it. Keep those scopes distinct and inspect the relevant records before retiring shared material.
Also distinguish retained alternatives from abandoned trials. An unused cover concept may be kept deliberately as project history, while a temporary test file may have no continuing purpose. Document the distinction rather than allowing every old asset to remain indefinitely or deleting every unreferenced file indiscriminately.
Preserve source and review evidence
Determine whether the file supports a source-use record, comparison, or accepted editorial decision. A reference image might not belong in the book itself but still explain the basis of a final illustration. Keep necessary evidence connected to the accepted asset even when it is stored outside the release folder.
Do not treat an unused-asset report as a rights or origin assessment. It indicates a relationship found or not found by a particular process. Whether material may be published and how it was created are separate questions that require their own records and review.
Use a reversible cleanup plan
Create a reviewed list of files proposed for removal from active working folders and state the reason for each group. Where uncertainty remains, separate the candidates from active release assets while preserving a recovery path. Avoid making the only copy disappear before the project has tested the result.
Keep cleanup distinct from changes to the accepted publication package. If a file is still referenced, removing it may create a new missing-asset problem rather than resolve a warning. Update the relevant source deliberately and verify the resulting export when retirement requires a manuscript or design change.
Verify the project after cleanup
Reopen representative editable files and rebuild the relevant outputs using the intended workflow. Inspect whether expected images and source dependencies remain available. A report with fewer candidate files is not enough evidence that the project can still produce the accepted edition.
Save the cleanup record with the project inventory, including what was retained and why. If a later edition introduces new uses, review the current state rather than assuming the old unused classification still applies. The useful outcome is a clear, maintainable set of working and release assets with the evidence needed for future revisions preserved.
Frequently asked questions
Clear answers for this publishing decision.
Does unused mean safe to delete?
Not automatically. Establish the report's scope and inspect other uses, editable dependencies, and retained project evidence before deciding.
Can an unused source image still be necessary?
Yes. The book may use an exported derivative while the original remains necessary for editing or traceability. Preserve that relationship in the asset record.
Should old trials stay in the release folder?
Keep the release package clear, but manage working history deliberately. Distinguish files needed for revision from disposable experiments and retain a recovery path during uncertain cleanup.
What should be checked after removing candidates?
Verify that the relevant editable files reopen and the expected outputs can still be produced. Inspect the actual resulting package rather than relying only on the changed report count.
What must I check, disclose, and verify myself when AI helped produce the book?
Review facts, rights, and source material yourself, record which parts were AI-assisted or AI-generated so you can answer Amazon’s disclosure question accurately, and treat every automated check as a starting point rather than a verdict.
See what the compliance checks cover