Claim review editor

A review note that says "check the numbers" is not a review. It moves the work to whoever reads the note, and by then the draft is usually published. Attaching the verdict to the exact span that carries the claim changes the question from an opinion about the document to a state that can be counted: this figure is verified, that one needs a source, this sentence is a hallucination.

It also makes review transferable. A second reader can see which claims were checked, by which of the three verdicts, and go straight to the ones nobody has ruled on rather than re-reading everything evenly.

Verified means you saw the evidence and it supports the sentence as written. Needs source means the claim may well be true but nothing in the file or the briefing backs it yet — it is a debt, not a pass. Hallucination means the sentence contradicts the source, names a study or law that does not exist, or states a figure nobody can trace.

Unresolved is the fourth state, and it is the default. A mark that has not been ruled on stays amber, so a ledger showing twelve unverified claims is an honest picture of the work left rather than a false sense of completeness.

The scan targets figures, percentages, money, dates and years; assertion vocabulary such as must, required by law, guaranteed, clinically proven, dosage and the named regimes; and attribution phrases like according to and research shows. Those are the places where a document makes a debt to evidence.

Opinions, definitions and ordinary narrative are left alone. This is a triage tool, not a fact-checker: it finds the sentences that need a human decision and records what you decided. The decision itself is still yours.