01 / START HERE
A useful way to approach it.
A source-linked answer can still contain a sentence the source does not support. Verification starts with the sentence, not the length of the bibliography. Take the claims that could change your decision and check each against the original material. A short answer with three checked claims can be more useful than a polished report with twenty unexamined links.
Use o1 to organize the review, then open the evidence yourself. Enabled web search can help retrieve material in the signed-in workspace, but availability and a citation do not guarantee accuracy. This guide produces a correction ledger rather than an automatic truth score. Its sample claims and excerpts are fictional so you can practice the method without mistaking the example for research.
02 / THE PROCESS
Go from question to next step.
- 01
Select the claims that matter
Break the answer into individual factual statements. Prioritize prices, capabilities, dates, comparisons, and numbers that affect your next action. A sentence containing several claims may need several rows. Keep recommendations in a separate column so a sensible suggestion does not make an unsupported fact appear verified.
- 02
Open the original material
Follow each citation and locate the passage that supposedly supports the claim. Check that the page belongs to the stated publisher and that the content is accessible. A search result, broken link, or page about a related topic is insufficient. Write down the page title and the section you actually reviewed.
- 03
Compare wording and scope
Look for changes in meaning: 'some customers' becoming 'all customers', 'may' becoming 'will', or a pilot result becoming a general promise. Check the geography, sample, product tier, and time period. A number without its denominator or measurement definition can be technically copied and still lead to a misleading conclusion.
- 04
Resolve contradictions explicitly
When two sources disagree, check whether they measure different things or describe different dates. Prefer the source appropriate to the claim, not whichever supports your preferred answer. Record both statements if the disagreement remains unresolved. Ask the assistant to explain the conflict using only the supplied passages, then inspect that explanation too.
- 05
Rewrite and retain a review trail
Mark each claim supported, partly supported, unsupported, or unresolved. Rewrite overly broad statements with their actual conditions and remove claims you cannot establish. Keep enough of the ledger for another reader to reproduce the check. Revisit time-sensitive evidence before using it in a consequential decision or publishing the answer.
03 / YOUR STARTING POINT
A prompt you can make your own.
Replace the bracketed fields. Add only information you have permission to share. This is a reusable text prompt; it does not run a task from this page.
Audit these claims: {{claims}} against these original source passages and URLs: {{sources}}. Produce a ledger with exact claim, supporting passage, date and scope, status, and proposed correction. Use supported, partly supported, unsupported, or unresolved. Do not treat a relevant link as proof. Flag missing denominators, changed wording, outdated evidence, and inference presented as fact. If a page cannot be opened, say so. Finish with the three claims I should inspect manually before using this answer.04 / SEE THE SHAPE OF IT
Illustrative citation audit
Fictional claims and authored excerpts; the table demonstrates review decisions rather than a live verification result.
| Draft claim | Supplied evidence | Review result |
|---|---|---|
| Every plan includes export | S1: export listed under Team plan | Partly supported; name the plan |
| Setup takes ten minutes | S2: one customer's account | Unsupported as a general promise |
| Offer is available now | S3: announcement with no release date | Unresolved; check release documentation |
| Monthly limit is 20 | S4: current guide says 20 per workspace | Supported with workspace condition |
The corrected answer keeps the useful facts and makes the conditions visible instead of assigning an invented accuracy percentage.
05 / KEEP YOUR JUDGMENT
What to watch before you use it.
Counting citations instead of checking them
Several links can repeat the same unsupported statement. Trace the claim to material that directly establishes it.
Silently changing a claim
Keep the original wording beside the correction. Readers need to understand what was too broad and why it changed.
Treating confidence as evidence
An assistant's confident tone or self-assigned score is not a substitute for a relevant passage and a reproducible check.
06 / THE FINAL PASS
A little review goes a long way.
Your checks stay on this page. They do not approve or run a task.
07 / GOOD QUESTIONS
Before you begin.
Does a citation mean the answer is verified?
No. It points to material you can inspect. The page must support the exact claim under the relevant conditions, and the answer must preserve that scope. A citation can be real while the associated sentence is still misleading.
Should I remove every inference?
Inference can be useful when it is clearly labeled and grounded in stated evidence. Explain the reasoning and identify what would change it. Remove an inference when readers could reasonably mistake it for something the source directly establishes.
What if verification changes the recommendation?
Update the recommendation and explain which corrected assumption changed it. Keep the previous claim in your working ledger so the revision is understandable. Do not preserve a preferred conclusion by substituting weaker supporting material.