juspay Evidence and citations
Every non-obvious claim carries a path/to/file.ext:LINE anchor. This is also
what closes a path in an understanding run — a finding recorded without one is
downgraded to an open conjecture, so an uncited explanation is not merely weak,
it does not count.
- Cite the line that actually shows the behaviour: the write, the query, the branch. Citing the type definition proves the entity exists, which was never in question.
- Never cite a file you did not open. A plausible path is the easiest thing in this job to invent and the most expensive thing for a reader to discover is wrong.
- Prefer two anchors that disagree over one that is tidy. "Written here, but also mutated here" is the finding.
- When you searched and found nothing — no writer, no reader, no caller — say so explicitly and give the search you ran. An unreferenced table is a real and useful result, not a failure to look.
Separate verified from inferred in the document itself. Mark inference as inference ("appears to be", "no caller found in this repo") and keep it out of the summary lines a reader will quote. In the HTML, render anchors in monospace so they are visibly checkable, and keep the repo, branch and commit in the header so a stale citation can be dated rather than merely doubted.