Source of Truth Creator v1.1
Purpose: Create Source of Truth documents that are epistemically calibrated and Clarity Gate-ready.
Core Question: "When someone reads this document, will they have accurate confidence in each claim?"
Core Principle: "A Source of Truth that overstates certainty is worse than no Source of Truth -- it creates false confidence. Calibration matters more than completeness."
Prior Art: This skill synthesizes established frameworks (GRADE, ICD 203, PRISMA, IIA Standards). Our contribution is practical accessibility, not new concepts. See docs/PRIOR_ART.md.
Origin: Extracted from Clarity Gate meta-verification (2025-12-21). When we ran Clarity Gate on its own Source of Truth document, we discovered failure modes specific to SoT creation. See: Clarity Gate SOURCE_OF_TRUTH.md
When to Use This Skill
Use when:
- •Claims will be cited elsewhere
- •Decisions depend on accuracy
- •Document will be read by people who don't know your epistemic standards
- •Creating authoritative reference for a project
- •Consolidating research from multiple sources
User phrases that trigger this skill:
- •"Create a source of truth for..."
- •"Document the verified state of..."
- •"I need an authoritative reference for..."
- •"Consolidate this research into..."
Do NOT use when:
- •Taking meeting notes (use simple markdown)
- •Brainstorming (uncertainty is the point)
- •Personal project logs (overkill)
- •Quick summaries (no verification needed)
- •Internal team scratchpads
For lightweight documentation, use plain markdown. This skill is for documents where epistemic rigor matters.
The Recursion Problem
Source of Truth documents face a unique challenge:
- •A Source of Truth claims to be "VERIFIED"
- •But verification requires... a Source of Truth
- •At some point, claims bottom out in human judgment
This skill doesn't solve the recursion -- it makes it visible.
The goal is not infinite regress verification. The goal is:
- •Clear marking of WHERE claims bottom out
- •Honest confidence levels for each claim type
- •Visual calibration so readers don't over-trust
The Eight Failure Modes
These patterns emerged from meta-verification of the Clarity Gate Source of Truth document. Modes 1-5 were discovered during that verification; Mode 6 was identified during review as a common pattern.
1. THE VERIFIED HEADER TRAP
Problem: Document header says "Status: VERIFIED" but body contains estimates, hypotheticals, and acknowledged uncertainties.
Why it matters: Readers skim headers. A "VERIFIED" badge creates false confidence in all contents.
| Fails | Passes |
|---|---|
| "Status: VERIFIED -- Ready for publication" | "Status: VERIFIED (with noted exceptions)" |
| "All claims verified as of [date]" | "External claims verified; internal claims marked by confidence level" |
Fix: Always qualify the header status, or use the Verification Summary box.
2. THE INTERNAL MEASUREMENT TRAP
Problem: Internal measurements (timing, counts, informal tests) marked as "Verified" with the same formatting as externally-validated claims.
Why it matters: "12 seconds" from one informal run is not equal to "12 seconds" from rigorous benchmarking.
| Fails | Passes |
|---|---|
| "Pipeline time: 12 seconds -- Verified: 2025-12-21" | "Pipeline time: ~12 seconds [single run, informal timing]" |
| "Manual review: 45 minutes -- Internal source" | "Manual review: ~45 minutes [ESTIMATED, not measured]" |
Fix: Add methodology notes: [MEASURED: n=X, conditions Y], [INFORMAL: single observation], [ESTIMATED: author judgment]
3. THE SELF-ASSESSMENT TRAP
Problem: Self-assigned scores (8.8/10, "High confidence") presented in tables that look like external validation.
Why it matters: Numeric scores trigger authority heuristics. "9.5/10" looks objective even when self-assigned.
| Fails | Passes |
|---|---|
| "Credibility: 9/10" in a metrics table | "Self-Assessment: Credibility: 9/10 (author judgment)" |
| "Confidence: High" | "Confidence: High (author assessment, not external audit)" |
Fix: Always label self-assessments explicitly in the table header or row.
4. THE ABSENCE-AS-PROOF TRAP
Problem: "No prior art found" marked as "Verified" when absence of evidence is not equal to evidence of absence.
Why it matters: A more thorough search might find what you missed. Gap claims are inherently uncertain.
| Fails | Passes |
|---|---|
| "Novel approach: Verified -- No prior art found" | "Novel approach: No prior art found (to author's knowledge, Dec 2025 search)" |
| "Gap exists: Verified" | "Gap exists (systematic search; absence harder to prove)" |
Fix: Add epistemological caveat to all "X doesn't exist" claims.
5. THE ILLUSTRATIVE-AS-DATA TRAP
Problem: Hypothetical examples (96% efficiency, 50-claim document) appear in data tables alongside measured values.
Why it matters: Examples become cited as data. "~96% reduction" migrates from illustrative to factual.
| Fails | Passes |
|---|---|
| "HITL efficiency: ~96% -- Verified: 2025-12-21" | "HITL efficiency: ~96% -- ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE" |
| "48/50 claims pass automated checks" in metrics table | Move to examples section, not metrics |
Fix: Keep illustrative examples OUT of data tables. Use separate "Examples" sections.
6. THE STALENESS TRAP
Problem: "Verified: 2025-12-21" on rapidly-changing claims (competitor features, pricing, URLs).
Why it matters: A URL verified yesterday may 404 today. External claims have different shelf lives.
| Fails | Passes |
|---|---|
| "Competitor X has no RAG feature -- Verified: 2025-12-21" | "Competitor X has no RAG feature -- Verified: 2025-12-21 [CHECK BEFORE CITING]" |
| "Pricing: $99/month -- Verified: 2025-12-21" | "Pricing: $99/month -- Verified: 2025-12-21 [VOLATILE -- verify before use]" |
Fix: Add staleness markers:
- •
[STABLE]-- historical facts, standards, completed events - •
[CHECK BEFORE CITING]-- competitor features, pricing, team info - •
[VOLATILE -- verify before use]-- URLs, API endpoints, market data - •
[SNAPSHOT -- [date] only]-- stock prices, user counts, rankings
7. THE TEMPORAL INCOHERENCE TRAP
Problem: Document dates are wrong at creation time — not stale, just incorrect.
Why it matters: A document claiming "Last Updated: December 2024" when created in December 2025 will mislead any reader or LLM about temporal context. Unlike staleness (claims that decay), this is an error at creation.
| Fails | Passes |
|---|---|
| "Last Updated: December 2024" (current date is December 2025) | "Last Updated: December 2025" |
| v1.0.0 dated 2024-12-23, v1.1.0 dated 2024-12-20 (out of order) | Versions in chronological order |
| "Deployed Q3 2025" written in Q1 2025 (future as fact) | "PLANNED: Q3 2025 deployment" |
| "Current CEO is X" (when X left 2 years ago) | "As of Dec 2025, CEO is Y" |
Sub-checks:
- •Document date vs current date: Is "Last Updated" correct? In future? Suspiciously old?
- •Internal chronology: Are version numbers, changelog entries, event dates in logical sequence?
- •Reference freshness: Do "current", "now", "today" claims have date qualifiers?
Fix:
- •Verify "Last Updated" matches actual update date
- •Check all dates are in chronological order
- •Add "as of [date]" to time-sensitive claims
- •Use future tense for planned items
Relationship to Mode 6 (Staleness):
- •Mode 6 catches claims that WILL become stale (volatility)
- •Mode 7 catches dates that are ALREADY wrong (incoherence)
8. THE UNVERIFIED SPECIFIC CLAIMS TRAP
Problem: Specific numbers (pricing, statistics, rates) included in Verified Data without actually verifying them.
Why it matters: Specific numbers look authoritative. "$0.005 per call" in a Source of Truth document will be trusted and propagated — even if it's 10x wrong. These are "confident plausible falsehoods."
| Fails | Passes |
|---|---|
| "API cost: ~$0.005 per call" (unverified) | "API cost: ~$0.001 per call (Gemini 2.0 Flash pricing, Dec 2025)" |
| "Papers average 15-30 equations" (guessed) | "Papers contain ~0.5-2 equations per page (PNAS study, varies by field)" |
| "40% of researchers use X" (no source) | "40% of researchers use X (Smith et al. 2024, n=500)" |
| "Competitors charge $99/month" (assumed) | "Competitor X charges $99/month (pricing page, Dec 2025) [VOLATILE]" |
Red flags requiring verification:
| Type | Example | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | "$X.XX", "~$X per Y" | Check official pricing page |
| Statistics | "X% of", "averages Y" | Find citation or mark as estimate |
| Rates/ratios | "X per Y", "X times faster" | Verify methodology or mark as claim |
| Competitor claims | "No one offers X", "All competitors do Y" | Verify or hedge ("to our knowledge") |
| Industry facts | "The standard is X" | Cite source or add date qualifier |
Fix options:
- •Verify and cite: Add source with date
- •Move to Estimates: If unverifiable, don't put in Verified Data
- •Generalize: "low cost" instead of "$0.005"
- •Add uncertainty: "reportedly ~$0.005 (unverified)"
Relationship to Mode 6 (Staleness):
- •Mode 6 marks claims that will decay (pricing marked VOLATILE)
- •Mode 8 catches claims that were never verified in the first place
Key insight: A claim can have correct staleness markers AND still be wrong. "$0.005 [VOLATILE]" is properly marked for staleness but may still be factually incorrect.
Staleness Risk Categories
Note: Staleness markers (Mode 6) address FUTURE decay. But claims must also be VERIFIED at creation time (Mode 8). A claim marked [VOLATILE] that was never verified is still wrong.
| Category | Examples | Typical Shelf Life | Marker |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stable | Historical facts, published papers, standards | Years | [STABLE] |
| Moderate | Company descriptions, product categories | Months | [CHECK BEFORE CITING] |
| Volatile | Pricing, feature lists, API endpoints, URLs | Days to weeks | [VOLATILE] |
| Snapshot | Stock prices, user counts, rankings | Point-in-time only | [SNAPSHOT] |
Minimum Viable Source of Truth
For simple projects, use this lightweight version (~40 lines when filled):
# [Topic] -- Source of Truth **Last Updated:** [YYYY-MM-DD] **Owner:** [Name] **Status:** VERIFIED (with noted exceptions) --- ## Verification Status | Category | Status | Confidence | |----------|--------|------------| | External claims | Verified | High | | Internal claims | Owner verified | High | | Measurements | [Formal/Informal] | [High/Medium] | | Estimates | Marked as such | N/A | | Temporal coherence | Dates verified | High | | Specific claims | Verified against sources | High | **Exceptions:** [Any caveats] --- ## Verified Data | Claim | Value | Source | Verified | Staleness | |-------|-------|--------|----------|-----------| | [claim] | [value] | [source] | [date] | [STABLE/VOLATILE] | --- ## Estimates (NOT VERIFIED) | Claim | Value | Basis | |-------|-------|-------| | [claim] | ~[value] | [author estimate] | --- ## Open Items | Priority | Description | Status | |----------|-------------|--------| | [H/M/L] | [description] | [status] |
Use the Full Template below when you need:
- •Gap analysis (claiming novelty)
- •Self-assessment scores
- •Prior art tracking
- •Extensive source documentation
- •Component status tracking
Full Template
# [Project/Topic] -- Source of Truth **Last Updated:** [YYYY-MM-DD] **Owner:** [Name] **Status:** VERIFIED (see Verification Status below) **Version:** [X.Y] --- ## Verification Status | Category | Status | Confidence | Staleness Risk | |----------|--------|------------|----------------| | External claims (stable) | Verified against sources | High | STABLE | | External claims (volatile) | Verified [date] | High | CHECK BEFORE CITING | | Internal claims | Verified by owner | High | Low | | Measurements | [Formal/Informal] | [High/Medium] | Low | | Gap claims | Systematic search | Medium | Medium | | Estimates | Marked as such | N/A | N/A | | Self-assessments | Author judgment | N/A | N/A | | Temporal claims | Dates verified against current | High | N/A | | Specific numbers (pricing, stats) | Verified against sources | High | Per-claim | **Last verified:** [date] by [owner] **Exceptions:** [Specific caveats if any] **Re-verify before use:** [List volatile claims] --- ## Verified Data ### External Sources -- Stable | Claim | Value | Source | Reference | Verified | Staleness | |-------|-------|--------|-----------|----------|-----------| | [claim] | [value] | External | [URL/citation] | [date] | STABLE | ### External Sources -- Volatile | Claim | Value | Source | Reference | Verified | Staleness | |-------|-------|--------|-----------|----------|-----------| | [claim] | [value] | External | [URL] | [date] | CHECK BEFORE CITING | ### Internal Sources | Claim | Value | Methodology | Confidence | Verified | |-------|-------|-------------|------------|----------| | [claim] | [value] | [how measured] | [High/Medium/Low] | [date] | --- ## Estimates and Projections (NOT VERIFIED DATA) | Claim | Value | Basis | Status | |-------|-------|-------|--------| | [claim] | ~[value] | [author estimate / calculation] | ESTIMATE | --- ## Status Tracker | Component | Status | Notes | |-----------|--------|-------| | [component] | [None / Planned / In Progress / Completed] | [details] | --- ## Gap Analysis (Author Assessment) | Domain | Existing Solutions | Gap Identified | Confidence | |--------|-------------------|----------------|------------| | [domain] | [what exists] | [what's missing] | [High/Medium] (search [date]) | **Note:** Gap claims reflect author's search as of [date]. Absence of evidence is not equal to evidence of absence. --- ## Self-Assessment (Author Judgment) **WARNING: These scores are self-assigned, not externally validated.** | Dimension | Score | Rationale | |-----------|-------|-----------| | [dimension] | [X/10] | [why] | --- ## Unverified Claims Claims that appear elsewhere but require caution: | Claim | Issue | Required Action | Status | |-------|-------|-----------------|--------| | [claim] | [why uncertain] | Mark as [ESTIMATED] / [ILLUSTRATIVE] | [Done/Pending] | --- ## Open Items | ID | Priority | Description | Status | Owner | |----|----------|-------------|--------|-------| | 1 | [H/M/L] | [description] | [status] | [owner] | --- ## Changelog ### v[X.Y] ([YYYY-MM-DD]) - [change] --- ## Document Metadata | Field | Value | |-------|-------| | Document Type | Source of Truth | | Version | [X.Y] | | Created | [YYYY-MM-DD] | | Last Updated | [YYYY-MM-DD] | | Owner | [Name] | | Status | VERIFIED (with noted exceptions) |
Quick Checklist
Run through before finalizing:
| Check | Pass? |
|---|---|
| Header status qualified ("with noted exceptions")? | |
| Verification Status box present? | |
| Internal measurements marked with methodology? | |
| Self-assessments labeled as author judgment? | |
| "X doesn't exist" claims hedged? | |
| Illustrative examples NOT in data tables? | |
| Estimates in separate section from verified data? | |
| Volatile claims marked with staleness warnings? | |
| "Re-verify before use" list for URLs/competitors? | |
| Document "Last Updated" date is correct? | |
| All dates in chronological order (versions, events)? | |
| Specific pricing verified against official sources? | |
| Statistics have citations (not just plausible guesses)? | |
| "Current" claims have date qualifiers? |
Relationship to Clarity Gate
| This Skill | Clarity Gate |
|---|---|
| Creates Source of Truth documents | Verifies any document |
| Prevents epistemic failures during creation | Detects epistemic failures after creation |
| Provides templates | Provides checklists |
| Focuses on calibration | Focuses on detection |
Workflow:
- •Use Source of Truth Creator to draft the document
- •Run Clarity Gate on the result
- •Iterate until PASS
What This Skill Does NOT Do
- •Does not verify external claims (use web search, citations)
- •Does not replace domain expertise
- •Does not guarantee completeness
- •Does not solve the recursion problem (only makes it visible)
This skill ensures: Documents are structured for epistemic honesty, with appropriate uncertainty markers and reader calibration.
Related
- •Clarity Gate -- Verification skill (use after creation)
- •Stream Coding -- Full documentation-first methodology
- •Prior Art -- Academic and industry sources
- •Author: Francesco Marinoni Moretto
Changelog
v1.1 (2025-12-28)
- •ADDED: Mode 7 - Temporal Incoherence Trap
- •Catches wrong dates at creation (not just future staleness)
- •Date vs current date validation
- •Chronological order verification
- •ADDED: Mode 8 - Unverified Specific Claims Trap
- •Catches pricing/statistics included without verification
- •"Confident plausible falsehoods" prevention
- •Verification-before-inclusion requirement
- •UPDATED: Templates to include temporal and specific claim verification
- •UPDATED: Quick Checklist with new verification items
- •ALIGNMENT: Matches Clarity Gate v1.5 Points 8-9
v1.0 (2025-12-21)
- •Initial release
- •Six failure modes documented
- •Full and minimum viable templates
- •Staleness Risk Categories
- •Quick checklist
Version: 1.1 Scope: Source of Truth document creation Output: Epistemically calibrated Source of Truth document