banterny

Proposition Audit — Security skill for Claude Code

Security community

A Claude skill for post-hoc verification of AI-generated factual and interpretive claims.

How to install Proposition Audit

This entry records only its repository, not the path inside it, so there is no exact command to give. Open banterny/proposition-audit and copy the folder into ~/.claude/skills/, or the file into ~/.claude/agents/.

What Proposition Audit does

A Claude skill for post-hoc verification of AI-generated factual and interpretive claims. Designed for barristers and solicitors in England and Wales with strongest fit for clinical-negligence and healthcare-law practice.

Alternatives in Security

Google Workspace Model Armor — Filter user-generated content for safety 21.6k ★
Security Scan Report — Generated: 2026-04-10 20:48 UTC Skills scanned: 134 Total findings: 836 Critical: 32 High: 50 Safe skills: 100 18.1k ★
Data Viz Audit — Audit a data visualization for chart type selection, accessible color palette, annotations, and anti-patterns 309 ★

README

Proposition Audit

A Claude skill for post-hoc verification of AI-generated factual claims. Extracts each distinct proposition, classifies it by type, searches authoritative sources, scores trustworthiness transparently, and flags what needs attention before professional use.

Designed for barristers and solicitors in England and Wales, with strongest fit for clinical-negligence and healthcare-law practice. The methodology generalises to any professional context where AI-drafted factual content needs structured verification before going out under the user's name.

What this skill does

The skill applies a five-step audit to any AI-generated output containing factual or interpretive claims:

Classification. Each claim is extracted and classified into one of four types — empirical fact, citation or reference, legal or regulatory proposition, interpretive or analytical claim — and assigned a salience (load-bearing, supporting, or illustrative) so verification effort is proportionate to argumentative weight.
Domain-routed search. Clinical claims route to PubMed, Cochrane, NICE, and specialty guidelines before general web search; legal claims to legislation.gov.uk and caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk; quantum and arithmetic claims to deterministic recompute rather than search. The routing matters because generic web search performs poorly for technical content.
Source-tier scoring. Claims are scored 0–100% with a verdict band (Verified, Likely accurate, Partially supported, Interpolated, Weakly supported, Poorly supported, Contradicted) or marked Unverifiable when search cannot surface adequate sources. Source quality outweighs source quantity: one Cochrane review beats three secondary news reports.
Qualitative legal assessment. Legal and regulatory propositions are not scored numerically. They receive a qualitative verdict (Accurate, Broadly accurate, Incomplete or misleading, Inaccurate) with the primary source consulted and any interpretive