Deep research source verification prompt for checking every important claim
Audit a deep research report by mapping decisive claims to exact passages, dates, source types and conflicting evidence.
- Works in
- ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini
- You need
- The final research report · The full text of cited sources · The decision the report supports
- Written for
- deep research fact checking prompt
A bibliography is not a verification system. This prompt connects every decisive sentence to the passage that is supposed to carry it, then shows where the connection breaks.
Use it after the deep research brief builder and before the report reaches the person making the decision.
Audit this research report against the supplied source text. Do not improve
the prose and do not search for replacement evidence until the audit is done.
Extract every claim that could change the decision. For each claim return:
Claim | Decision impact | Cited source | Exact passage | Source type |
Publication date | Direct partial absent or contradictory | Conflict |
Manual check needed
Direct means the passage supports the whole claim. Partial means it supports
only part or carries a condition the report removed. Absent means the source
is related but does not prove the claim. Contradictory means it says the
opposite.
Trace statistics to the earliest source provided. If several pages repeat the
same number, count them as one evidence chain. Flag missing denominators,
mixed currencies, unlike time periods and comparisons built from different
methods.
Then produce three lists:
1. Claims safe to use as written.
2. Claims that must be qualified or rewritten.
3. Claims that require a new primary source before the report can support the
decision.
Finish with a short verdict on whether the report is ready for its intended
use. Do not calculate a trust score.
Decision: [DECISION]
Report: [PASTE REPORT]
Source text: [PASTE EACH SOURCE WITH URL TITLE AND DATE]What to change
Everything in square brackets is yours to replace. Nothing else needs editing.
[DECISION]- Verification should focus first on the claims that can actually change the action.
[PASTE REPORT]- Paste the final version so the audit examines the exact wording a reader will receive.
[PASTE EACH SOURCE WITH URL TITLE AND DATE]- Full relevant passages let the model judge support without pretending it opened a link.
How to run it
- 01Collect the evidence
Copy relevant passages from every source used for a decisive claim, including headings and dates.
- 02Run the audit in a fresh conversation
A separate context reduces the chance that the original research process influences the verdict.
- 03Resolve the third list first
Claims needing primary evidence can invalidate the decision and deserve attention before stylistic edits.
- 04Record the verification date
Current facts decay. Add the date to the approved report so future readers understand its limits.
Questions people ask
Why not let the model browse for missing sources immediately?
Searching while auditing can hide the fact that the original report was unsupported. Finish the evidence audit first, then commission a separate search for gaps.
Does a direct citation prove a claim is true?
No. It proves that the source says it. You must still judge whether the source is credible, current and suitable for the decision.
Unsubscribe in one click. We never pass your address on.