Source Of Truth

Source of Truth Creator v1.1

Purpose: Create Source of Truth documents that are epistemically calibrated and Clarity Gate-ready.

Core Question: "When someone reads this document, will they have accurate confidence in each claim?"

Core Principle: "A Source of Truth that overstates certainty is worse than no Source of Truth -- it creates false confidence. Calibration matters more than completeness."

Prior Art: This skill synthesizes established frameworks (GRADE, ICD 203, PRISMA, IIA Standards). Our contribution is practical accessibility, not new concepts. See docs/PRIOR_ART.md.

Origin: Extracted from Clarity Gate meta-verification (2025-12-21). When we ran Clarity Gate on its own Source of Truth document, we discovered failure modes specific to SoT creation. See: Clarity Gate SOURCE_OF_TRUTH.md

When to Use This Skill

Use when:

• Claims will be cited elsewhere
• Decisions depend on accuracy
• Document will be read by people who don't know your epistemic standards
• Creating authoritative reference for a project
• Consolidating research from multiple sources

User phrases that trigger this skill:

• "Create a source of truth for..."
• "Document the verified state of..."
• "I need an authoritative reference for..."
• "Consolidate this research into..."

Do NOT use when:

• Taking meeting notes (use simple markdown)
• Brainstorming (uncertainty is the point)
• Personal project logs (overkill)
• Quick summaries (no verification needed)
• Internal team scratchpads

For lightweight documentation, use plain markdown. This skill is for documents where epistemic rigor matters.

The Recursion Problem

Source of Truth documents face a unique challenge:

1. A Source of Truth claims to be "VERIFIED"
2. But verification requires... a Source of Truth
3. At some point, claims bottom out in human judgment

This skill doesn't solve the recursion -- it makes it visible.

The goal is not infinite regress verification. The goal is:

• Clear marking of WHERE claims bottom out
• Honest confidence levels for each claim type
• Visual calibration so readers don't over-trust

The Eight Failure Modes

These patterns emerged from meta-verification of the Clarity Gate Source of Truth document. Modes 1-5 were discovered during that verification; Mode 6 was identified during review as a common pattern.

1. THE VERIFIED HEADER TRAP

Problem: Document header says "Status: VERIFIED" but body contains estimates, hypotheticals, and acknowledged uncertainties.

Why it matters: Readers skim headers. A "VERIFIED" badge creates false confidence in all contents.

Fix: Always qualify the header status, or use the Verification Summary box.

2. THE INTERNAL MEASUREMENT TRAP

Problem: Internal measurements (timing, counts, informal tests) marked as "Verified" with the same formatting as externally-validated claims.

Why it matters: "12 seconds" from one informal run is not equal to "12 seconds" from rigorous benchmarking.

Fix: Add methodology notes: [MEASURED: n=X, conditions Y], [INFORMAL: single observation], [ESTIMATED: author judgment]

3. THE SELF-ASSESSMENT TRAP

Problem: Self-assigned scores (8.8/10, "High confidence") presented in tables that look like external validation.

Why it matters: Numeric scores trigger authority heuristics. "9.5/10" looks objective even when self-assigned.

Fix: Always label self-assessments explicitly in the table header or row.

4. THE ABSENCE-AS-PROOF TRAP

Problem: "No prior art found" marked as "Verified" when absence of evidence is not equal to evidence of absence.

Why it matters: A more thorough search might find what you missed. Gap claims are inherently uncertain.

Fix: Add epistemological caveat to all "X doesn't exist" claims.

5. THE ILLUSTRATIVE-AS-DATA TRAP

Problem: Hypothetical examples (96% efficiency, 50-claim document) appear in data tables alongside measured values.

Why it matters: Examples become cited as data. "~96% reduction" migrates from illustrative to factual.

Fix: Keep illustrative examples OUT of data tables. Use separate "Examples" sections.

6. THE STALENESS TRAP

Problem: "Verified: 2025-12-21" on rapidly-changing claims (competitor features, pricing, URLs).

Why it matters: A URL verified yesterday may 404 today. External claims have different shelf lives.

Fix: Add staleness markers:

• [STABLE] -- historical facts, standards, completed events
• [CHECK BEFORE CITING] -- competitor features, pricing, team info
• [VOLATILE -- verify before use] -- URLs, API endpoints, market data
• [SNAPSHOT -- [date] only] -- stock prices, user counts, rankings

7. THE TEMPORAL INCOHERENCE TRAP

Problem: Document dates are wrong at creation time — not stale, just incorrect.

Why it matters: A document claiming "Last Updated: December 2024" when created in December 2025 will mislead any reader or LLM about temporal context. Unlike staleness (claims that decay), this is an error at creation.

Sub-checks:

1. Document date vs current date: Is "Last Updated" correct? In future? Suspiciously old?
2. Internal chronology: Are version numbers, changelog entries, event dates in logical sequence?
3. Reference freshness: Do "current", "now", "today" claims have date qualifiers?

Fix:

• Verify "Last Updated" matches actual update date
• Check all dates are in chronological order
• Add "as of [date]" to time-sensitive claims
• Use future tense for planned items

Relationship to Mode 6 (Staleness):

• Mode 6 catches claims that WILL become stale (volatility)
• Mode 7 catches dates that are ALREADY wrong (incoherence)

8. THE UNVERIFIED SPECIFIC CLAIMS TRAP

Problem: Specific numbers (pricing, statistics, rates) included in Verified Data without actually verifying them.

Why it matters: Specific numbers look authoritative. "$0.005 per call" in a Source of Truth document will be trusted and propagated — even if it's 10x wrong. These are "confident plausible falsehoods."

Red flags requiring verification:

Fix options:

1. Verify and cite: Add source with date
2. Move to Estimates: If unverifiable, don't put in Verified Data
3. Generalize: "low cost" instead of "$0.005"
4. Add uncertainty: "reportedly ~$0.005 (unverified)"

Relationship to Mode 6 (Staleness):

• Mode 6 marks claims that will decay (pricing marked VOLATILE)
• Mode 8 catches claims that were never verified in the first place

Key insight: A claim can have correct staleness markers AND still be wrong. "$0.005 [VOLATILE]" is properly marked for staleness but may still be factually incorrect.

Staleness Risk Categories

Note: Staleness markers (Mode 6) address FUTURE decay. But claims must also be VERIFIED at creation time (Mode 8). A claim marked [VOLATILE] that was never verified is still wrong.

Minimum Viable Source of Truth

For simple projects, use this lightweight version (~40 lines when filled):

# [Topic] -- Source of Truth

**Last Updated:** [YYYY-MM-DD]  
**Owner:** [Name]  
**Status:** VERIFIED (with noted exceptions)

---

## Verification Status

| Category | Status | Confidence |
|----------|--------|------------|
| External claims | Verified | High |
| Internal claims | Owner verified | High |
| Measurements | [Formal/Informal] | [High/Medium] |
| Estimates | Marked as such | N/A |
| Temporal coherence | Dates verified | High |
| Specific claims | Verified against sources | High |

**Exceptions:** [Any caveats]

---

## Verified Data

| Claim | Value | Source | Verified | Staleness |
|-------|-------|--------|----------|-----------|
| [claim] | [value] | [source] | [date] | [STABLE/VOLATILE] |

---

## Estimates (NOT VERIFIED)

| Claim | Value | Basis |
|-------|-------|-------|
| [claim] | ~[value] | [author estimate] |

---

## Open Items

| Priority | Description | Status |
|----------|-------------|--------|
| [H/M/L] | [description] | [status] |

Use the Full Template below when you need:

• Gap analysis (claiming novelty)
• Self-assessment scores
• Prior art tracking
• Extensive source documentation
• Component status tracking

Full Template

# [Project/Topic] -- Source of Truth

**Last Updated:** [YYYY-MM-DD]  
**Owner:** [Name]  
**Status:** VERIFIED (see Verification Status below)  
**Version:** [X.Y]

---

## Verification Status

| Category | Status | Confidence | Staleness Risk |
|----------|--------|------------|----------------|
| External claims (stable) | Verified against sources | High | STABLE |
| External claims (volatile) | Verified [date] | High | CHECK BEFORE CITING |
| Internal claims | Verified by owner | High | Low |
| Measurements | [Formal/Informal] | [High/Medium] | Low |
| Gap claims | Systematic search | Medium | Medium |
| Estimates | Marked as such | N/A | N/A |
| Self-assessments | Author judgment | N/A | N/A |
| Temporal claims | Dates verified against current | High | N/A |
| Specific numbers (pricing, stats) | Verified against sources | High | Per-claim |

**Last verified:** [date] by [owner]
**Exceptions:** [Specific caveats if any]
**Re-verify before use:** [List volatile claims]

---

## Verified Data

### External Sources -- Stable

| Claim | Value | Source | Reference | Verified | Staleness |
|-------|-------|--------|-----------|----------|-----------|
| [claim] | [value] | External | [URL/citation] | [date] | STABLE |

### External Sources -- Volatile

| Claim | Value | Source | Reference | Verified | Staleness |
|-------|-------|--------|-----------|----------|-----------|
| [claim] | [value] | External | [URL] | [date] | CHECK BEFORE CITING |

### Internal Sources

| Claim | Value | Methodology | Confidence | Verified |
|-------|-------|-------------|------------|----------|
| [claim] | [value] | [how measured] | [High/Medium/Low] | [date] |

---

## Estimates and Projections (NOT VERIFIED DATA)

| Claim | Value | Basis | Status |
|-------|-------|-------|--------|
| [claim] | ~[value] | [author estimate / calculation] | ESTIMATE |

---

## Status Tracker

| Component | Status | Notes |
|-----------|--------|-------|
| [component] | [None / Planned / In Progress / Completed] | [details] |

---

## Gap Analysis (Author Assessment)

| Domain | Existing Solutions | Gap Identified | Confidence |
|--------|-------------------|----------------|------------|
| [domain] | [what exists] | [what's missing] | [High/Medium] (search [date]) |

**Note:** Gap claims reflect author's search as of [date]. Absence of evidence is not equal to evidence of absence.

---

## Self-Assessment (Author Judgment)

**WARNING: These scores are self-assigned, not externally validated.**

| Dimension | Score | Rationale |
|-----------|-------|-----------|
| [dimension] | [X/10] | [why] |

---

## Unverified Claims

Claims that appear elsewhere but require caution:

| Claim | Issue | Required Action | Status |
|-------|-------|-----------------|--------|
| [claim] | [why uncertain] | Mark as [ESTIMATED] / [ILLUSTRATIVE] | [Done/Pending] |

---

## Open Items

| ID | Priority | Description | Status | Owner |
|----|----------|-------------|--------|-------|
| 1 | [H/M/L] | [description] | [status] | [owner] |

---

## Changelog

### v[X.Y] ([YYYY-MM-DD])
- [change]

---

## Document Metadata

| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| Document Type | Source of Truth |
| Version | [X.Y] |
| Created | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
| Last Updated | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
| Owner | [Name] |
| Status | VERIFIED (with noted exceptions) |

Quick Checklist

Run through before finalizing:

Relationship to Clarity Gate

Workflow:

1. Use Source of Truth Creator to draft the document
2. Run Clarity Gate on the result
3. Iterate until PASS

What This Skill Does NOT Do

• Does not verify external claims (use web search, citations)
• Does not replace domain expertise
• Does not guarantee completeness
• Does not solve the recursion problem (only makes it visible)

This skill ensures: Documents are structured for epistemic honesty, with appropriate uncertainty markers and reader calibration.

Related

• Clarity Gate -- Verification skill (use after creation)
• Stream Coding -- Full documentation-first methodology
• Prior Art -- Academic and industry sources
• Author: Francesco Marinoni Moretto

Changelog

v1.1 (2025-12-28)

• ADDED: Mode 7 - Temporal Incoherence Trap
  • Catches wrong dates at creation (not just future staleness)
  • Date vs current date validation
  • Chronological order verification
• ADDED: Mode 8 - Unverified Specific Claims Trap
  • Catches pricing/statistics included without verification
  • "Confident plausible falsehoods" prevention
  • Verification-before-inclusion requirement
• UPDATED: Templates to include temporal and specific claim verification
• UPDATED: Quick Checklist with new verification items
• ALIGNMENT: Matches Clarity Gate v1.5 Points 8-9

v1.0 (2025-12-21)

• Initial release
• Six failure modes documented
• Full and minimum viable templates
• Staleness Risk Categories
• Quick checklist

Version: 1.1 Scope: Source of Truth document creation Output: Epistemically calibrated Source of Truth document