인터페이스는 현지화되어 있으며, Skill 소개와 설명 문서는 선택한 언어로 AI가 자동 번역합니다. 코드·명령어·경로·전문 용어는 원문을 유지하며 원작자 문서가 우선합니다.
Skills 둘러보기
생산성 및 협업 · SKILL.md

fact-check-pass

fact-check-pass

Run a claim-by-claim fact-check pass on a draft article, script, or report before publication. Use when asked to fact-check a piece, verify claims before publishing, or do editorial verification. Produces a claim inventory (every checkable assertion pulled out), a verification status and source for each (confirmed / needs sourcing / unverifiable / wrong), t…

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Skill 문서

GitHub

name: fact-check-pass description: "Run a claim-by-claim fact-check pass on a draft article, script, or report before publication. Use when asked to fact-check a piece, verify claims before publishing, or do editorial verification. Produces a claim inventory (every checkable assertion pulled out), a verification status and source for each (confirmed / needs sourcing / unverifiable / wrong), the fixes, and a flag on the high-risk claims (numbers, quotes, names, legal/defamatory statements) that must not go out unverified."

Fact-Check Pass Skill

Everything in a published piece is a claim someone can be wrong about — a date, a number, a quote, an implication. This skill does what a good fact-checker does: it pulls every checkable assertion out of the prose, verifies each against a source, and stops the high-risk ones (stats, quotes, anything defamatory) from going out on a "probably right."

Working from a brief

Given the draft, produce the claim inventory and status — check what you can against the provided/known sources, and for anything you can't verify, mark it clearly rather than guessing. Never assert a fact is confirmed without a basis.

Required Inputs

Ask for (if not provided, else infer and label):

  • The draft (article, script, report)
  • Available sources — the reporter's notes, documents, links, transcripts
  • Risk level / venue — where it publishes and how litigious/high-stakes the subject is

Output Format

Claim inventory

Every checkable assertion extracted:

#Claim (as written)TypeStatusSource / basisFix
  • Type: number/stat · quote · name/title · date · causal/implied · characterization.
  • Status: ✅ confirmed · 🟡 needs sourcing · ⚠️ unverifiable · 🔴 wrong/misleading.

High-risk flags

The claims that must not publish unverified — statistics, direct quotes and their attribution, named individuals (especially any allegation), superlatives ("first," "only," "largest"), and anything potentially defamatory. Each with what's needed to clear it.

Fixes

For every 🔴/⚠️: the correction, a hedge to the supportable version, or "cut it." For 🟡: the source to obtain.

Sign-off

What's still open before this can publish, and a note that quotes should be confirmed with the speaker/transcript and legal review sought for anything defamatory.

Quality Checks

  • Every checkable claim is inventoried, not just the obvious ones
  • Each claim has a status and a named source/basis (or is marked unverifiable)
  • Numbers, quotes, names, and superlatives are treated as high-risk and flagged
  • Potentially defamatory statements are flagged for verification and legal review
  • Nothing is marked confirmed without an actual basis
  • Every problem claim has a concrete fix (correct / hedge / cut)

Anti-Patterns

  • Reading for tone instead of extracting discrete claims
  • Marking something "confirmed" on memory or vibes
  • Letting a round number or a paraphrased quote through unchecked
  • Missing implied/causal claims because they're not stated as facts
  • Waving through a defamatory line without verification or legal input
  • Rewriting the prose instead of flagging and sourcing the facts

Example Trigger Phrases

  • "Fact-check a piece."
  • "Verify claims before publishing."
  • "Do editorial verification."
저장한 Skills