Protocol

Cross-check the fact before the agent acts on it

Confidence is a writing style. Evidence is a different object.

When it fits

  • A generated factual claim will drive a consequential decision, message, configuration or transaction.

When to avoid it

  • A cited page can be wrong, stale or derivative; source quality and independence still matter.

Why it matters

Identify the factual proposition that matters to the action, then verify it against a trusted primary or independent source appropriate to the domain. Keep the source with the decision so later reviewers can see what was actually checked. Increase scrutiny with impact; low-stakes drafting does not need the same burden as a legal, financial, security or medical action.

Steps

  1. The consequential action no longer depends solely on an uncited model assertion.

An example

Before an agent changes an API integration based on a remembered parameter, check the current vendor documentation for that endpoint.

Check your result

The consequential action no longer depends solely on an uncited model assertion.

Keep this limit in mind

  • A cited page can be wrong, stale or derivative; source quality and independence still matter.

Connected ideas

Useful with
Validate model output for the system that will consume it

Evidence and sources

Supports

OWASP recommends cross-checking critical LLM outputs against trusted external sources and using human oversight for sensitive information.

Two sources are not independent merely because two pages repeat the same underlying claim.

LLM09:2025 Misinformation · Cross-Verification and Human Oversight

All sources (1)