m2ai-portfolio Trust Score
Score any AI-generated file (deck, workbook, report, or document) on a 0–100 trust scale across five verifiable dimensions. Outputs a per-dimension scorecard with composite score and distribution gate. Use this before sharing any AI-generated artifact.
Trigger
Use when the user:
- Provides an AI-generated file (workbook, deck, report, document) and asks "is this ready to share?" or "can I trust this?"
- Says "trust score", "score this file", "/trust-score", or "check this before I send it"
- Wants a go/no-go signal before distributing an AI-generated deliverable
- Needs to track quality improvement across revisions of the same artifact
- Is building a pipeline and needs a numeric gate: "don't distribute files scoring below X"
Phase 1: Intake
Ask the user to provide:
- The artifact to score — paste content, share the file, or describe key elements
- The artifact type: workbook / deck / report / document
- Optional: intended audience and stakes (informs caveat phrasing in output)
If the user provides a file directly, accept it. If they describe it, ask enough clarifying questions to score each dimension accurately.
Phase 2: Score each dimension
Evaluate the artifact against five dimensions, each worth 0–20 points.
Source Traceability (0–20) Every significant claim, number, or assertion cites a specific source file, page, or cell reference.
- 20: All claims sourced with specific references
- 15: Most claims sourced; minor gaps in lower-stakes sections
- 10: Some claims sourced; recurring gaps in key assertions
- 5: Minimal sourcing; numbers appear without attribution
- 0: No sources cited anywhere
Formula Integrity (0–20) (skip for non-quantitative documents — assign 20 by default) Calculations use live, consistent formulas rather than hardcoded values; no error cells.
- 20: All outputs calculated from linked inputs; consistent formulas across like rows; no errors
- 15: Minor hardcodes in low-stakes areas; no errors; formulas consistent where it matters
- 10: Some hardcoded outputs in important areas; OR formula inconsistencies across rows
- 5: Significant hardcoding; outputs do not change when inputs change
- 0: No live formulas; all outputs are static typed values
Assumption Labeling (0–20) Estimates, projections, and interpretations are explicitly labeled and separated from verified facts.
- 20: All assumptions labeled; clearly distinguished from verified data
- 15: Most assumptions labeled; occasional unlabeled estimates in obvious context
- 10: Some labeling present; key assumptions blended with facts
- 5: Minimal labeling; assumptions and facts not distinguished
- 0: No assumptions labeled; everything presented as fact
Verification Trail (0–20) A checks tab, review memo, evidence map, or audit log exists confirming key outputs were verified.
- 20: Full verification documented (checks tab, review memo, or evidence map)
- 15: Partial verification — high-stakes outputs confirmed, others not
- 10: Light verification — spot checks only, not systematic
- 5: Single reviewer sign-off with no documented checks
- 0: No verification documented
Freshness (0–20) All data and dates are current; no stale ranges, deprecated sources, or outdated figures.
- 20: All data explicitly dated; within acceptable freshness window for the use case
- 15: Most data current; minor staleness in background sections
- 10: Some stale data in secondary sections; core figures current
- 5: Freshness unclear on key figures; dates missing from important data
- 0: No dates on data; staleness undetectable
Score conservatively: any unresolved gap in a dimension scores no higher than 15/20.
For AI-generated workbooks and decks, apply extra scrutiny to:
- Formula Integrity — AI commonly hardcodes outputs rather than building live calculations
- Source Traceability — AI commonly asserts claims with fabricated or unprovable citations
Phase 3: Output the scorecard
TRUST SCORE: XX/100
DIMENSION SCORES
────────────────────────────────────────────
Source Traceability XX/20 [PASS / PARTIAL / FAIL]
Formula Integrity XX/20 [PASS / PARTIAL / FAIL]
Assumption Labeling XX/20 [PASS / PARTIAL / FAIL]
Verification Trail XX/20 [PASS / PARTIAL / FAIL]
Freshness XX/20 [PASS / PARTIAL / FAIL]
DISTRIBUTION GATE
────────────────────────────────────────────
[SAFE TO SHARE / SHARE WITH CAVEATS / REVIEW REQUIRED / DO NOT SHARE]
≥ 80 SAFE TO SHARE
60–79 SHARE WITH CAVEATS — note open items to recipient
40–59 REVIEW REQUIRED — close named gaps before sending
< 40 DO NOT SHARE — fundamental trust issues present
FINDINGS
────────────────────────────────────────────
[Specific issues per dimension, most impactful first.
Be concrete: "Slide 7 claims $2.3M with no source" not "some numbers lack sources."]
NEXT STEPS
────────────────────────────────────────────
[Prioritized actions to raise the score, most impactful first]
PASS = 18–20, PARTIAL = 8–17, FAIL = 0–7.
Phase 4: Advisory follow-up
If the score is below 60, recommend the specific skill most likely to raise it fastest:
- Source gaps →
/evidence-map - Formula problems →
/workbook-doctor - Global hostile review →
/pretty-but-wrong - Pre-submission gate →
/preflight-check
Related skills
/pretty-but-wrong— hostile review that enumerates issues without scoring; run before this for a fuller issue list/workbook-doctor— deep audit with formula repair plan; use when formula integrity is below 10/evidence-map— traces every claim back to source data; use when source traceability is below 10/preflight-check— pre-flight checklist before any artifact ships