/fact-check

description: Fact-check claims or verify information
argument-hint: "<claim or statement to verify>"

Fact-check the following claim: $ARGUMENTS

Verification Process

1. Claim Decomposition

• Break the claim into verifiable components
• Identify key facts that need checking
• Note any ambiguities in the claim

2. Source Search

For each factual component:

• Find primary sources (official data, academic papers)
• Find secondary sources (reputable journalism)
• Look for counter-evidence

3. Verification Assessment

For each component, determine:

• **TRUE**: Strong evidence supports this
• **FALSE**: Strong evidence contradicts this
• **PARTIALLY TRUE**: Some aspects correct, others not
• **UNVERIFIABLE**: Cannot confirm with available sources
• **MISLEADING**: Technically true but lacks context

4. Context Analysis

• Is the claim missing important context?
• Is it outdated information presented as current?
• Are there caveats being omitted?

5. Source Quality Evaluation

Rate sources on:

• Authority (expertise of source)
• Recency (how current)
• Objectivity (potential bias)
• Corroboration (multiple sources agree)

Output Format

FACT CHECK REPORT
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Claim: [Original claim]
Verdict: [TRUE / FALSE / PARTIALLY TRUE / MISLEADING / UNVERIFIABLE]
Confidence: [HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

SUMMARY:
[1-2 sentence summary of finding]

DETAILED ANALYSIS:
[Component-by-component breakdown]

KEY SOURCES:
[List of primary sources used]

IMPORTANT CONTEXT:
[Any context needed to fully understand]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Be rigorous and objective. Acknowledge uncertainty where it exists.