
Fact Check
Verify claims against reliable sources with transparent confidence scoring
What You Can Do
You can transform raw claims from interviews, social media, press releases, and documents into fully-evidenced fact-check narratives with transparent confidence scoring. Claude structures your verification work into discrete, auditable steps that withstand editorial review and reader scrutiny, allowing you to separate provable fact from assertion quickly without sacrificing rigor even under deadline pressure.
Features
breaks complex claims into verifiable sub-claims for systematic checking
records each source, quote, and data point with full attribution and access dates
evaluates credibility of sources using journalistic standards
flags missing evidence, conflicting accounts, and unverifiable assertions
assigns transparent ratings (high/medium/low) to each finding with explicit reasoning
produces publication-ready fact-check text organized by claim with supporting evidence
documents verification work in a format that withstands editorial scrutiny and potential legal challenges
Example Output
Input claim: "Mayor Smith cut the police budget by 40% this year."
Output narrative:
Claim: Mayor Smith cut the police budget by 40% in the current fiscal year.
Verdict: PARTIALLY TRUE (Confidence: HIGH)
What we found:
- Budget document from city finance office (10/15/2024) shows police allocation decreased from $45M to $31.5M — a 30% reduction, not 40%
- Mayor's press release (10/14/2024) cites "strategic reallocation" of funds
- $13.5M reallocated to community programs per spending report
The gap: Difference between claimed 40% and documented 30%. Mayor's office has not responded to clarification requests as of 3 PM today.
Why we rate this HIGH confidence: Official budget documents with public timestamps provide strong foundation; discrepancy is quantifiable and small.
What's Included
- SKILL.md instruction file: core verification framework and prompt templates
- Claim decomposition worksheet: structured template for breaking down complex claims into verifiable components
- Evidence chain checklist: source documentation format with fields for attribution, access date, quote context, and reliability assessment
- Confidence scoring rubric: guidelines for rating findings as high/medium/low with explicit reasoning requirements
- Fact-check narrative template: publication-ready structure with claim, verdict, evidence summary, gaps, and confidence explanation
Who It's For
- Investigative journalists — documenting evidence chains for in-depth reporting and legal review
- Political reporters — rapidly fact-checking claims from candidates and officials on deadline
- Beat journalists — verifying expert claims and statistics relevant to your coverage area
- Newsroom fact-check teams — producing dedicated fact-check pieces with transparent methodology
- Breaking news reporters — quickly separating provable fact from assertion under time pressure
Best For
- Deadline-driven claim verification — moving rapidly from raw claim to verified narrative without sacrificing rigor
- Evidence chain documentation — creating audit trails for editorial review and potential legal challenges
- Confidence rating transparency — clearly communicating which findings are high-confidence vs. inconclusive to readers
- Breaking news fact-checks — separating provable facts from assertions within hours of a claim emerging
- Investigative follow-up — building ironclad evidence chains that can withstand source pushback and editorial scrutiny







