The article accurately describes the features of Japanese toilets and Toto's advice against using toilet paper on their seats to prevent scratches. It cites a representative from Toto and references specific features such as the Washlet's automatic lid and pressure controls. However, the factual accuracy could be strengthened by providing more direct quotes or data from Toto's official communications or the mentioned social media posts. Additionally, while it mentions the advice coming from cleaning experts and lifestyle sites, these sources are not named or directly referenced, which slightly diminishes the verifiability of the claims.

The article primarily presents the perspective of Toto and aligns with the company's stance on toilet maintenance. While it briefly mentions that similar recommendations have been made by cleaning experts and lifestyle sites, it does not explore any counterarguments or alternative viewpoints, such as dissenting opinions from users or other manufacturers. The lack of diverse perspectives results in a somewhat imbalanced narrative that could benefit from a broader range of voices, including potential critiques of Toto's materials or user experiences that might differ from the company's claims.

The article is generally clear and well-structured, with a logical flow that guides the reader through the issue of toilet maintenance and Toto's recommendations. The language is straightforward, and the tone remains neutral and informative throughout. The article effectively conveys complex information about toilet technologies in an accessible manner, avoiding jargon that could confuse readers. However, a slight improvement could be achieved by providing more explicit transitions between different sections or ideas, ensuring seamless navigation through the article's content.

The article references a representative from Toto and a Japanese newspaper, Mainichi Shimbun, as sources. However, it does not provide direct quotes or links to these sources, which raises questions about the reliability of the cited information. The absence of detailed source attribution, such as specific statements from Toto or expert opinions, limits the ability to fully assess the credibility and reliability of the information presented. Including a wider variety of authoritative sources, such as industry experts or consumer reviews, would enhance the source quality significantly.

The article provides some context regarding the issue of scratches on toilet seats but lacks thorough disclosure of potential conflicts of interest or affiliations. While it mentions Toto's investigation into more scratch-resistant materials, the article does not delve into the methodologies or specific findings of this investigation. Additionally, there is no discussion of the potential market implications or competitive dynamics within the Japanese toilet industry, which could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic. Greater transparency regarding these aspects would improve the article's overall credibility.