finding_propose
Propose a finding with citations for automatic corroboration against archived evidence, ensuring verdict integrity and reducing false claims.
Instructions
Propose a finding. The corroboration engine independently verifies it against archived tool output before the ledger records a verdict.
claim_type tells the engine what kind of claim this is: "observation" - a direct read of primary evidence (a value literally present in an artifact, e.g. a recipient address in a POST body or a process name in pslist). Confirmed when the value is really in the cited output. "inference" - an analytical conclusion (attribution, causation, intent). Confirmed only when independent sources agree; otherwise labeled an inference. Use this for anything that combines observations rather than quoting one.
Each citation is a dict: {exec_id, artifact, locator, asserted_value}. asserted_value is the exact string the claim depends on; the engine checks it is really in that execution's output. If the verdict comes back UNSUPPORTED, the claim is a likely hallucination: do not present it as fact, investigate further, then revise. If it comes back CONTRADICTED, an independent source disagrees: resolve it before it stands.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hypothesis_id | Yes | ||
| statement | Yes | ||
| citations | Yes | ||
| claim_type | No | inference | |
| conflicting_citations | No | ||
| confidence | No | medium |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |