How a draft becomes a defensible piece

1. 1

   Create a project from any draft

   Paste an article, newsletter, script or post. Sentence-level heuristics flag checkable statements — numbers, percentages, trends, superlatives, research citations — each with the reason it was flagged. Nothing is sent anywhere; extraction is local and deterministic.

2. 2

   Curate the claim list

   Tick the claims worth checking, untick noise, add claims the heuristics missed. Only selected claims count toward the report.

3. 3

   Search or source manually

   Each claim gets its own evidence workspace. Run a search (pluggable provider; a clearly-labelled demo corpus ships for keyless installs) or paste sources by hand — URL, title, publisher, publication date, and a short excerpt. Retrieval dates are stamped automatically.

4. 4

   Grade the sources

   Assign each source a quality tier (primary / reputable / general / weak) and availability (available / paywalled / unavailable / stale). Then set its stance on the claim: supports, contradicts or inconclusive, with a note.

5. 5

   Let verdicts follow the evidence

   A claim's verdict derives from its evidence table — support plus contradiction reads 'mixed'; no sources reads 'unresolved'. A named reviewer finalises each verdict, and supported/contradicted physically require linked evidence.

6. 6

   Approve and export the receipt

   Projects unlock approval when every selected claim is dealt with. The printable report lists each claim, its verdict line, and every source with publication and retrieval dates — including the honest 'no adequate sources found' where that's the truth.