Skip to content
Automation Squad
You run thisWritten for ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini (with web access)

Check a claim properly before I repeat it to anyone

Robert MacKelfresh

By Robert MacKelfresh

Founder, Automation Squad

The most common failure in fast-moving news isn't invention, it's staleness — a real announcement, accurately reported, that was reversed two days later while the coverage kept circulating. Sections 3 and 4 catch that specific failure, which no amount of general scepticism will, because the thing you're checking genuinely was true once.

The prompt

I'm about to repeat this claim: [THE CLAIM, IN THE EXACT WORDS YOU'D USE]

I saw it here: [WHERE — a link, a post, a newsletter, "a colleague said"]

Check it before I do. Use the web.

1. WHAT'S THE PRIMARY SOURCE? Not who reported it — who originally said or published it. If the claim is about a company's product, pricing or policy, the primary source is that company's own page. Give me the link and the date on it.

2. DOES THE PRIMARY SOURCE SAY WHAT THE CLAIM SAYS? Quote the relevant line. Then tell me plainly: fully supported, partly supported, or not supported. Partly is the common answer and the one people skip past.

3. WHEN. Give me the date the primary source was published AND the date it was last updated, if they differ. A vast amount of wrong AI news is right-but-stale — a real announcement that was later reversed or superseded.

4. HAS IT CHANGED SINCE? Specifically look for a later correction, reversal, or replacement. If the thing was announced and then cancelled, that is the story.

5. WHAT THE CLAIM LEAVES OUT. Conditions, regions, plan tiers, effective dates, "up to". These are where a technically-true claim becomes misleading.

6. THE VERSION I SHOULD ACTUALLY SAY. Rewrite my claim so it's accurate, including the qualifier it was missing. If it's simply wrong, say so and don't soften it.

If you can't reach the primary source, say that rather than substituting a secondary one and calling it verified.

Copy it, paste it, run it. Nothing here is gated.

More for the same job

Written for ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini (with web access) as of August 2026. Models change — if this stops working the way it should, that is worth telling us about.