learn-verify
Fact-check a teaching claim against sources so the learner can trust the single interface. Use when the user runs /learn-verify or /skill:learn-verify, or says fact-check, verify this, is this true, source this, don't hallucinate, or when a teach/plan step needs a claim checked before it is taught as fact.
Savant verdict: Review advised
Security analysis or source-hub review identified patterns requiring attention.
Live evaluation
Not evaluated yet. Workspaces can request a live evaluation.
Security assessment
Risk score
0/100
Recommendation
CAUTION
Severity
LOW
Savant decision
Passed (low risk)
The assessment recommended caution, but its risk score is below 20/100, so Savant's policy passes it. Its findings are still listed for review. Static security analysis completed.
0 patterns found
Structure
- The source hub's security checks flagged this skillSnyk: warn (Risk: MEDIUM · 1 issue)
SKILL.md
--- name: learn-verify description: > Fact-check a teaching claim against sources so the learner can trust the single interface. Use when the user runs /learn-verify or /skill:learn-verify, or says fact-check, verify this, is this true, source this, don't hallucinate, or when a teach/plan step needs a claim checked before it is taught as fact. license: MIT metadata: author: vasanthsreeram version: "1.0" source: "Eero Alvar — How I Use AI to Learn Things https://youtu.be/kzcI5F4tGiU" --- # Learn verify Trust is engineered. Check the claim before it is taught as fact. ## When to run - Empirical, historical, bibliographic, or API/tool claims - Named theorems, identities, or "standard facts" you cannot reconstruct - Anything you were about to present with unearned certainty Skip a full search only when you can derive the statement in-session and the learner does not need an external citation. Still say that it was derived, not sourced. ## Method 1. Write the claim in one falsifiable sentence. 2. Fetch or search primary-ish sources (paper, textbook, official docs, standard reference). Do not cite a URL you did not open. 3. Quote or paraphrase the supporting line. Note edition / year if it matters. 4. Mark disagreements. Prefer the source the field actually uses. 5. Return a verdict. ## Verdict ```markdown ## Claim … ## Verdict confirmed | qualified | contradicted | unknown ## Sources - <title> — <url or citation> — <what it says> ## Teach as <one sentence the teacher may now say, with any hedge> ``` `qualified` = true under stated assumptions (dimension, characteristic, gauge, version). `unknown` = do not teach it as fact. Say you could not verify. ## Rules - No invented papers, quotes, or page numbers. - One claim per run. Batch only if they are the same fact in different words. - Write the verdict into the session file if a teach session is open.