Many behavior change interventions for the prevention and treatment of HIV have been evaluated, but suboptimal reporting of evaluations hinders the accumulation of evidence and the replication of interventions. In this article, we address 4 practices contributing to this problem. First, detailed descriptions of the interventions and their implementation are often unavailable. Second, content of active control group content (such as usual care or support designed by researchers) often varies markedly between trials; yet, descriptions of this content are routinely omitted. Third, detailed process evaluations revealing the mechanisms by which interventions generate their effects, and among whom, frequently are not available. Fourth, there is a lack of replication in other contexts, which limits knowledge of external validity. This article advances recommendations made by an international group of scholars constituting the Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research (WIDER), which has developed brief guidance to journal editors to improve the reporting of evaluations of behavior change interventions, thereby serving as an addition to reporting statements such as CONSORT. Improved reporting standards would facilitate and accelerate the development of the science of behavior change and its application in implementation science to improve public health.