Audit Check

Phase 2: Check (Mechanical + AI Audit)

Two-stage checking: Python mechanical checks catch definite errors; Gemini batch audit catches judgment-call issues.

Stage 2a: Mechanical Checks (Python)

uv run python3 "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../../../skills/bluebook-audit/scripts/scan_formatting.py" --docx path/to/file.docx

Checks performed on ALL footnotes:

1. Journal name small caps - Comprehensive pattern list (law reviews, finance journals, newspapers, periodicals, forums)
2. Book title small caps - Detect italic book titles that should be small caps
3. Id. chain validation - Rule 4.1 mechanical check (single-source predecessor)
4. Signal italic consistency - All signals (see, cf., e.g.) must be italic
5. Terminal period - Every footnote must end with a period
6. Hereinafter consistency - Defined at first citation, used consistently after
7. Author name supra format - Text before *supra* should be roman, not italic (unless it's a case name short form). Catches *Manne, supra* → should be Manne, *supra*
8. Italic spillover - Trailing/leading spaces inside italic or small caps runs (e.g., *supra * should be *supra* ). These don't affect Word display but cause Gemini misparses

Stage 2a-ii: Bibliography drift

uv run python3 "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../../../skills/bluebook-audit/scripts/bib_gaps.py" \
  --docx path/to/file.docx --bib paper/references/sources.bib --out scratch/bib_additions.bib

make_bib_from_docx.py bootstraps a bib for a manuscript that has none; this is the counterpart for every round after the first. It reports article cites present in the footnotes and absent from the bib, and emits BibTeX for review.

Parsing is deterministic, not model-driven — a fabricated bib entry is worse than a missing one because it looks answered. A title containing a comma ("The Millennial Corporation: Strong Stakeholders, Weak Managers") cannot be separated from an author list positionally, so review the emitted entries before merging.

NBSP Handling

DOCX uses non-breaking spaces (\xa0) in abbreviations. ALL search functions must handle both \x20 and \xa0:

• No.\xa02106, Feb.\xa07, Oct.\xa021
• Wall St.\xa0J., Corp.\xa0Governance

Stage 2b: Gemini Batch Formatted Audit

Default: Use Gemini Batch API (50% cheaper, handles all footnotes in one job). Fallback to sync calls if batch is unavailable.

Step 1: Extract formatted footnotes

uv run python3 "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../../../skills/bluebook-audit/scripts/gemini_audit.py" --docx path/to/file.docx --extract-only

This outputs a JSON file mapping footnote numbers to formatted text with inline markup:

• *text* = italic
• [SC]text[/SC] = small caps
• Plain text = roman

Step 2: Submit Gemini Batch Job

Build a JSONL file with one request per footnote, then submit via Batch API:

# Build JSONL (one line per footnote)
for fn_num, formatted_text in footnotes.items():
    request = {
        "custom_id": f"fn-{fn_num}",
        "body": {
            "contents": [{"parts": [{"text": PROMPT.format(fn_num=fn_num, formatted_text=formatted_text)}]}],
            "generationConfig": {"responseMimeType": "application/json", "temperature": 0.1}
        }
    }

# Submit batch job (see /gemini-batch skill for full pattern)
# Use examples/batch_processor.py pattern — DO NOT guess API parameters

IMPORTANT: Follow the /gemini-batch skill's Iron Law — read examples/batch_processor.py before writing batch code.

Fallback (sync): If batch is unavailable, use:

uv run python3 "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../../../skills/bluebook-audit/scripts/gemini_audit.py" --docx path/to/file.docx

Gemini Prompt Focuses On:

• Source type classification (case, statute, article, book, newspaper, working paper, hearing, letter, regulation)
• Typeface correctness per Rule 2 (italic vs small caps vs roman)
• Abbreviation correctness per T6/T13
• Short form validity (cases must not use supra)

The Gemini audit MUST cover every footnote, not a subset. Auditing only "major" or "flagged" footnotes guarantees missed errors.

Previous failure: Auditing 45 of 239 footnotes missed 41 journal names needing small caps.

Stage 2c: Claude Cross-Footnote Review

Never trust a single agent. After Gemini's per-footnote audit, Claude reviews the full set for cross-footnote patterns that per-footnote analysis misses.

Claude receives:

1. ALL formatted footnotes (fits in 1M context at ~20-40K tokens)
2. Gemini's per-footnote findings
3. Mechanical check results

Claude reviews for:

• Supra chain validity — does supra note 42 actually point to the right source?
• Hereinafter consistency — defined at first citation? Used consistently after?
• Repeated source type errors — if Gemini misclassified one SEC release, it likely missed them all
• Id. chain context — predecessor footnote analysis that per-footnote Gemini can't see
• Gemini false positive filtering — flag Gemini suggestions that are likely wrong (SEC releases, exec orders, working papers)

Output: Annotated version of Gemini findings with cross-footnote issues added and false positives flagged.

Red Flags

• Sending plain text to Gemini → always include inline markup; plain text produces 10-20x false positives without formatting info.
• Auditing a subset of footnotes → audit ALL footnotes; subsets guarantee missed errors.
• Skipping NBSP variants in mechanical checks → always try both space types; NBSPs cause silent search failures.
• Trusting Gemini results without the Claude cross-check → always run Stage 2c; per-footnote review misses cross-footnote patterns.
• Trusting Claude review without mechanical checks → mechanical checks are authoritative for their categories; Claude misses deterministic patterns.
• Skipping any stage → run all three (mechanical → Gemini → Claude); each catches a different error class.

Merging Three-Layer Findings

Priority order: Mechanical > Claude cross-review > Gemini per-footnote

Mechanical checks are authoritative for deterministic rules:

• Signal italic formatting → trust mechanical checker (regex on run-level XML)
• Terminal periods → trust mechanical checker
• Id. chain validation → trust mechanical checker
• Journal/book small caps patterns → trust mechanical checker

Claude cross-review is authoritative for:

• Cross-footnote consistency (supra chains, hereinafter definitions)
• Gemini false positive filtering (source type misclassifications)
• Patterns across footnotes that per-footnote analysis misses

Gemini per-footnote is authoritative for:

• Individual source type classification (when not overridden by Claude)
• Abbreviation correctness (T6/T13 tables)
• Short form validity

Never drop a mechanical finding because Gemini or Claude didn't flag it. The mechanical checker catches 100% of signal issues by design.

Gate: Exit Check

Before proceeding to Report phase:

• scratch/audit_findings.json exists
• Mechanical check results cover ALL footnotes
• Gemini audit results cover ALL footnotes (verify count matches extract)
• Claude cross-footnote review complete
• Findings merged (mechanical > Claude > Gemini priority)
• bib_gaps.py run FIRST; any emitted entries reviewed and merged
• scan_formatting.py's journal list reconciled against the bib's journal values (see below)

Order matters. bib_gaps.py is what keeps sources.bib current, and the small-caps check is only as good as the list behind it. Run the gap check first and the bib supplies the article periodicals; run it last and the small-caps check is validating against a record that has already fallen behind — which is how J. Corp. L. survived a full audit.

Note what the bib does NOT cover: its journal field exists only on @article entries, so newspapers, magazines, blogs and BOOK titles are absent — 23 of this document's 54 small-capped names. Those stay the name list's job.

Next Phase

Read ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../../../skills/bluebook-audit/skills/audit-report/SKILL.md and follow its instructions.