Stats
Actions
Tags
From spotlight
Classifies findings by evidence strength using a grounding ladder. Use for fact-checking claims, assigning confidence, and diagnosing weak support in investigations.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/spotlight:epistemic-groundingThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Use this skill whenever Spotlight turns source material into claims or evaluates whether a claim is ready for editorial use.
Use this skill whenever Spotlight turns source material into claims or evaluates whether a claim is ready for editorial use.
The core question is:
Does this exact evidence justify believing this exact claim?
A source is only an anchor. Grounding is the relationship between the claim and the anchor.
Classify each candidate finding on this ladder:
Only levels 4-5 can be high confidence. Levels 1-2 are leads, not findings. Level 3 is at most medium confidence and often low.
For every finding or claim:
primary — original record, document, direct statement, data source, filing, archived page, or observable artifact.secondary — reporting, analysis, database aggregation, third-party summary.contextual — useful background, but not evidence for the claim.direct — evidence states the claim elements plainly.indirect — evidence supports the claim through a short, explicit inference.inferred — evidence requires unstated assumptions or synthesis across sources.contradicted — reliable evidence conflicts with the claim.insufficient — source does not support the claim.Use these caps even if the claim sounds plausible:
| Condition | Maximum Confidence |
|---|---|
| No scraped local file | low |
| Search snippet only | low |
| Source is contextual or adjacent | low |
| Evidence is inaccessible, abstract-only, or materially redacted | low |
| Claim requires unstated assumptions | medium |
| Only secondary sources support the claim | medium |
| Single primary source, no contradiction search yet | medium |
| Direct primary source plus independent corroboration | high |
| Credible unresolved contradiction | low or disputed |
Never upgrade a claim beyond the weakest material element. If the amount is directly supported but the date is inferred, the whole claim is only partially grounded.
Every findings.json finding must include:
"grounding": {
"support_type": "direct|indirect|inferred|contradicted|insufficient",
"source_role": "primary|secondary|contextual",
"claim_elements_supported": ["actor", "action", "date"],
"missing_assumptions": [],
"confidence_cap": "high|medium|low",
"misgrounding_risk": "short risk statement",
"grounding_rationale": "why the evidence does or does not ground the claim; include the contradiction-search outcome here"
}
Every fact-check claim must include a grounding_assessment explaining whether the cited evidence actually grounds the claim.
When a finding feels wrong, do not patch the wording first. Diagnose the grounding failure:
Read references/failure-router.md for deeper failure classes. Read references/grounding-theory.md when designing or revising grounding policy.
npx claudepluginhub buriedsignals/spotlight --plugin spotlightEvaluates claims by triangulating sources, rating evidence quality, and reaching confidence-rated conclusions. Use for fact-checking, due diligence, or resolving conflicting evidence.
Entry point for the investigation toolkit. Routes to the right skill for tracing sources, decomposing claims, auditing evidence, generating counter-hypotheses, or triangulating across independent sources.
Extracts and verifies factual claims from PR copy or journalistic drafts, providing citations and warning on low certainty. Use before sending pitches or press releases.