Analyze-Verify 150 Protocol

Core Principle: No claim without proof. Every critical fact needs: source + confidence level. If unsure, keep digging until confident or escalate to user.

What This Skill Does

When you invoke this skill, you're asking AI to:

Source every claim — Trace facts to verifiable sources
Quantify confidence — Express certainty as percentage
Verify independently — Cross-check from multiple sources
Loop until confident — Keep researching if <85% confidence
Escalate when stuck — Ask user if sources exhausted

The 150% Proof Rule

| Dimension | 100% Core | +50% Enhancement | |-----------|-----------|------------------| | Source | Primary source identified | + Independent confirmation | | Confidence | Percentage stated | + Reasoning documented | | Verification | Single source check | + Multi-source cross-validation | | Gaps | Note uncertainties | + Active Loop150 to fill gaps |

Confidence Level Framework

| Level | % Range | Description | Action Required | |-------|---------|-------------|-----------------| | Verified | 95-100% | Multiple primary sources, no contradictions | Use in critical decisions | | Strong | 85-94% | Reliable sources, minor uncertainties | Safe for most purposes | | Moderate | 75-84% | Limited sources, some gaps | Flag for verification | | Weak | 50-74% | Insufficient evidence, major gaps | Do not use without confirmation | | Insufficient | <50% | Contradictory or missing | Reject, research further |

When to Use This Skill

Critical decisions — Where wrong facts cause real damage
Legal/compliance — Where accuracy has legal implications
Architecture decisions — Where claims drive major choices
Stakeholder communication — Where credibility matters
Any high-stakes claim — When you can't afford to be wrong

Execution Protocol

Step 1: CLAIM FORMULATION

State the fact clearly:

🔍 **Claim:** [Precise factual statement]
**Context:** [Why this matters]
**Critical Level:** [High/Medium/Low]

Step 2: PRIMARY SOURCE

Find the original source:

Locate primary evidence
Verify authenticity
Extract direct quote/data

Step 3: SECONDARY CONFIRMATION

Find independent corroboration:

Different source type
Cross-reference data
Check consistency

Step 4: CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Calculate confidence:

**Evidence Evaluation:**
├── Primary Source: [Quality assessment]
├── Secondary Sources: [Count and quality]
├── Contradictions: [Any found?]
└── Gaps: [What's missing?]

**Confidence:** [X]%
**Reasoning:** [Why this percentage]

Step 5: DECISION

Confidence ≥85%? 
├─ YES → Use fact with stated confidence
└─ NO → Enter Loop150

Loop150 Continuous Verification

When confidence <85%:

🔄 **LOOP150 ACTIVATED** (Current: [X]%)

ITERATION 1: EXPAND SOURCES
├── Identify new source types
├── Use alternative research methods
├── Broaden search scope
↓
ITERATION 2: DEEPER ANALYSIS
├── Drill into source details
├── Verify source credibility
├── Check contextual factors
↓
ITERATION 3: CROSS-VALIDATION
├── Compare against known facts
├── Test logical consistency
├── Seek expert corroboration
↓
RECALCULATE: New confidence = [Y]%

Continue loop until:
├─ ≥90% achieved → EXIT, proceed with confidence
└─ Sources exhausted → ESCALATE to user

Source Quality Criteria

🔍 RELIABILITY FACTORS:

Authority: Official, expert, or primary source?
Currency: How recent and up-to-date?
Objectivity: Free from bias or agenda?
Methodology: Sound research methods used?
Independence: Not dependent on other sources?

📊 EVIDENCE STRENGTH: | Type | Strength | Example | |------|----------|---------| | Primary | High | Original data, first-hand | | Secondary | Medium | Analysis of primary | | Tertiary | Low | Summaries, reviews | | Statistical | High | Large sample, proper method | | Anecdotal | Variable | Personal experience |

Output Format

🔍 **PROOF-GRADE 150 VERIFICATION**

**Claim:** [Precise factual statement]

**Primary Source:** 
- [File/location/date]
- "[Direct quote or data]"

**Secondary Sources:**
- [Source 2]: [Confirmation]
- [Source 3]: [Confirmation]

**Confidence Level:** [X]% 
**Reasoning:** [Why this level]

**Validation Method:** [How verified]
**Outstanding Issues:** [Any uncertainties]

**Status:** ✅ VERIFIED | ⚠️ NEEDS CONFIRMATION | ❌ INSUFFICIENT

Operational Rules

EVERY CRITICAL CLAIM: Requires proof-grade validation
SOURCE FIRST: Identify source before using fact
CONFIDENCE REQUIRED: Every fact has percentage
LOOP150 MANDATORY: <85% triggers verification loop
TRANSPARENCY: Document all sources and reasoning
ESCALATE HONESTLY: If sources exhausted, ask user

Failure Modes & Recovery

| Failure | Detection | Recovery | |---------|-----------|----------| | Unverified Claims | Facts without sources | Immediate verification, Loop150 | | Overconfidence | Inflated percentages | Recalculate with scrutiny | | Source Bias | Only confirming sources | Actively seek contradictions | | Incomplete Docs | Missing source trail | Document all sources now |

Examples

❌ Without Proof-Grade

AI: "The API response time is fast enough"
Source: "Feels fast to me"
Result: Performance issues in production

✅ With Proof-Grade 150

🔍 PROOF-GRADE 150 VERIFICATION

Claim: "API response time is consistently under 200ms"

Primary Source:
- /tests/performance/load_test_results.json
- "p99 latency: 187ms across 10,000 requests"

Secondary Sources:
- Production monitoring (last 7 days): avg 156ms
- APM dashboard: p95 = 178ms

Confidence Level: 95%
Reasoning: Multiple measurement sources, consistent results,
production data confirms test environment findings.

Validation Method: Cross-referenced test data with production metrics

Status: ✅ VERIFIED FOR USE

Relationship to Other Skills

research-deep-150 → Gathers evidence
proof-grade-150 → Validates and quantifies confidence
integrity-check-150 → Final quality verification

Remember: Proof-grade isn't about being slow — it's about being trustworthy. A 95% confidence claim is more valuable than an unverified assertion. When stakes are high, proof-grade protects everyone.