Free source verification tool

AI Citation Integrity Checklist

Use this checklist when Claude or another AI assistant gives you a citation. It produces a risk score and a short action plan while keeping all notes in your browser.

ai hallucinated citationsverify ai citationsclaude citation checker

Interactive workspace

Checklist
The cited work exists at a stable URL or in a scholarly database.
A DOI, PMID, arXiv ID, ISBN, trial ID, or other stable identifier resolves.
Title, authors, year, venue, and publisher match the cited source.
You inspected the passage, figure, table, or section that supports the claim.
The passage supports the exact claim, including the verb strength and scope.
The evidence level is recorded: full text, abstract only, metadata only, or unverified.
Retraction, expression of concern, and correction status were checked where relevant.
At least one contradiction or stronger-evidence check was attempted.
The source is current enough for the claim or the date limitation is stated.
The citation points to primary evidence or the source type is disclosed.
The final source was saved in Zotero, BibTeX, RIS, CSV, or another audit trail.
The AI-generated wording was rewritten or accepted only after human verification.

Risk result

0

verified score

Not scored yet

Answer the checklist to calculate citation risk.

Action list

  • Score a citation to see required verification actions.

Notebook note

Ready.

Privacy note: this tool is client-side only. Inputs stay in your browser unless you copy, download, or paste the output somewhere else.

How to use this tool

  1. Paste the citation, URL, DOI, PMID, arXiv ID, or title.
  2. Write the exact claim the citation is supposed to support.
  3. Answer the verification checklist from the source itself.
  4. Review the risk score and required next actions.
  5. Copy the markdown note into your evidence table or notebook.

FAQ

Does the checklist prove that a citation is correct?

No. It helps you structure verification. You still need to inspect the source, passage, and metadata yourself.

Why include retraction and contradiction checks?

A source can exist and support a narrow claim while still being unsuitable because it is retracted, superseded, or contradicted by stronger evidence.

Related workflows

Citation disciplineSource CheckingA practical protocol for checking Claude citations, web-search results, DOI metadata, Zotero libraries, and conflicting evidence.Citation verificationHallucinated CitationsHow to detect, verify, and document AI hallucinated citations before they enter a literature review, manuscript, memo, or grant draft.Single-paper workflowPaper TriageA paper-triage protocol for using Claude to extract claims, methods, limitations, figures, and follow-up questions from scientific articles.

More free tools

Protocol BuilderBuild an exportable literature review protocol and Claude prompts for search design, screening, extraction, and synthesis.Prompt LibraryFilter and copy field-tested Claude prompts for literature search design, paper triage, methods critique, gap analysis, grants, and reproducibility.