Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
待分类只读github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计异常

verify-claims验证索赔

Agent Skill

verify-claims 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

661

周安装

27

GitHub Stars

66

下载量

212
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:verify-claims(验证索赔)
来源仓库:https://github.com/indranilbanerjee/digital-marketing-pro
仓库路径:skills/verify-claims
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/indranilbanerjee/digital-marketing-pro --skill verify-claims
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/indranilbanerjee/digital-marketing-pro --skill verify-claims

简介

verify-claims 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态进行整理时使用。

  • 适用于代码协作事项管理和仓库状态跟踪,可辅助处理开发流程中的协作问题。
  • 通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装,需确认权限范围和维护状态。
  • 使用前建议核实是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写操作,确保符合安全边界。
  • 适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

SKILL.md

/dm:verify-claims

Purpose

Cross-check marketing claims against user-provided evidence data. Extracts all verifiable claims from content — statistics, percentages, rankings, awards, certifications, named citations, performance metrics, customer counts, and time-bound assertions — then matches each against an evidence file and classifies it as verified, partially verified, unverified, or contradicted. This command is the dedicated deep-dive for claim integrity, while /dm:eval-content includes claim verification as one dimension of its broader quality assessment.

Marketing content that cites specific numbers, awards, or results without verified backing is a brand risk. Contradicted claims erode trust if caught by customers, journalists, or regulators. This command ensures every factual assertion in your content is backed by real data, clearly sourced, and defensible under scrutiny.

Input Required

The user must provide (or will be prompted for):

  • Content with claims: The text to verify — provided inline, as a pasted block, or as a file path. Any marketing content that makes factual assertions: landing pages, case studies, press releases, ad copy, pitch decks, investor materials, product pages, or client reports
  • Evidence file (optional but strongly recommended): A JSON file containing source data to verify against. Format: [{"claim": "descriptive claim text", "source": "data source name or URL", "date": "YYYY-MM-DD when verified", "verified": true/false, "value": "the verified number or fact"}]. Can be exported from GA4, CRM, sales data, certification bodies, or assembled manually. If not provided, the command operates in extraction-only mode and guides the user on creating an evidence file
  • Specific claim to check (optional): A single claim to focus on instead of scanning the full content — useful for quick spot-checks on a particular statistic or assertion

Process

  1. Load brand context: Read ~/.claude-marketing/brands/_active-brand.json for the active slug, then load ~/.claude-marketing/brands/{slug}/profile.json. Apply compliance rules for target markets (skills/context-engine/compliance-rules.md) — some industries and regions have stricter requirements for substantiating claims (financial services, healthcare, EU consumer protection). Also check for guidelines at ~/.claude-marketing/brands/{slug}/guidelines/_manifest.json — if present, load messaging restrictions that may define approved claims and prohibited assertions. Check for agency SOPs at ~/.claude-marketing/sops/. If no brand exists, ask: "Set up a brand first (/dm:brand-setup)?" — or proceed with defaults.
  2. Extract claims from content: Execute scripts/claim-verifier.py --action extract-claims --text "{content}" to identify all verifiable assertions. The extractor categorizes claims by type:

- Statistical claims: Percentages, ratios, growth numbers, market size figures ("73% increase in conversions," "4.8x ROAS") - Ranking claims: Position assertions, comparative statements ("market leader," "#1 rated," "fastest-growing") - Award and certification claims: Named awards, industry certifications, compliance badges ("ISO 27001 certified," "G2 Leader") - Named citation claims: Attributed quotes, source references, study citations ("according to Gartner," "Forrester reports") - Performance claims: Customer counts, time-bound results, SLA promises ("10,000+ customers," "results in 30 days") - Temporal claims: Date-specific assertions, recency claims ("as of 2026," "latest data shows")

  1. Verify claims against evidence: If an evidence file is provided, execute scripts/claim-verifier.py --action verify --text "{content}" --evidence {evidence_file}. For each extracted claim, the verifier:

- Attempts to match the claim to an evidence entry by semantic similarity and claim type - Classifies the match result: Verified (claim matches evidence within acceptable tolerance), Partially verified (claim is directionally correct but specific numbers differ, or the source date is stale), Unverified (no matching evidence entry found), or Contradicted (evidence directly conflicts with the claim) - Assigns a confidence score (0-100) to each verification based on match quality, source recency, and specificity alignment

  1. Handle missing evidence file: If no evidence file is provided, skip the verification step. Instead, present all extracted claims with their types and flag each as "unverified — no evidence provided." Guide the user on creating an evidence file:

- Explain the JSON format with examples for each claim type - Suggest data sources: GA4 for performance metrics, CRM for customer counts, certification bodies for awards, published reports for industry statistics - Offer to generate a template evidence file pre-populated with the extracted claims (values left blank for the user to fill)

  1. Detail contradictions: For each contradicted claim, present a side-by-side comparison: the claim text as written in the content, the evidence data that conflicts, the specific discrepancy (e.g., "content says 73% increase, evidence shows 61% increase"), and the potential impact of publishing the incorrect claim (reputational, regulatory, competitive).
  2. Recommend corrections: For unverified and contradicted claims, provide specific recommendations:

- Contradicted claims: Suggest corrected text using the evidence value, with hedging language options if exact figures are sensitive ("approximately," "over X," "nearly Y") - Unverified claims: Suggest adding source attribution, softening absolute statements to qualified ones, or removing the claim until evidence is available - Stale evidence: Flag claims where the evidence date is more than 12 months old and recommend refreshing the data

  1. Generate verification summary: Produce an overall verification score (percentage of claims verified or partially verified), a risk assessment based on the number and severity of contradicted and unverified claims, and a compliance note if the brand operates in a regulated industry where unsubstantiated claims carry legal risk.

Output

A structured verification report containing:

  • Verification score: Percentage of claims that are verified or partially verified — the headline metric for content claim integrity
  • Claims inventory: Total claims extracted, broken down by type (statistical, ranking, award, citation, performance, temporal) — showing the scope of factual assertions in the content
  • Per-claim verification results: For each claim:

- The claim text as it appears in the content, with location - Claim type classification - Verification status: Verified, Partially verified, Unverified, or Contradicted - Evidence match: The specific evidence entry it was checked against (if any), with source and date - Confidence score (0-100) for the verification - Issue details: For partially verified or contradicted claims, the specific discrepancy - Recommended action: Keep as-is, update with correct value, add source attribution, soften language, or remove

  • Contradiction details: Side-by-side comparison for each contradicted claim — content text vs. evidence data, with the specific discrepancy highlighted and corrected text suggestion
  • Unverified claims list: All claims with no matching evidence, grouped by risk level (high-risk: specific numbers and absolute statements; moderate-risk: comparative claims and rankings; low-risk: general qualitative assertions)
  • Stale evidence warnings: Claims where the supporting evidence is older than 12 months, with a recommendation to refresh the data
  • Corrected text suggestions: For each claim needing correction, the original text and one or more replacement options — an exact-value version using the evidence data and a hedged version with qualifier language
  • Evidence file template: If no evidence file was provided, a pre-populated JSON template with all extracted claims ready for the user to fill in verified values and sources
  • Compliance notes: If the brand operates in a regulated industry (financial services, healthcare, legal, insurance), specific regulatory requirements for claim substantiation with references to relevant rules (FTC Act, EU Consumer Rights Directive, ASA CAP Code, industry-specific regulations)

Agents Used

  • quality-assurance — Claim extraction from content using pattern matching and NLP heuristics, claim-to-evidence matching with semantic similarity and type alignment, verification status classification with confidence scoring, contradiction detection with discrepancy quantification, correction text generation with hedging options, and compliance-aware risk assessment for regulated industries

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

33.77%
按下载量换算72

Claude

30.91%
按下载量换算66

Cursor

17.1%
按下载量换算36

Gemini CLI

9.88%
按下载量换算21

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

未通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills