---
name: mohitagw15856/source-triangulation
source: https://app.decimal.ai/s/mohitagw15856-source-triangulation@1/SKILL.md
source_sha256: a8c91d767dc4
---

# Source Triangulation Skill

Most "well-sourced" claims are one source wearing costumes: a stat born in a vendor's report, echoed by a blog, cited by a journalist, and now "widely reported" — three citations, one origin, zero verification. Triangulation is the discipline of asking two questions before repeating anything: *where was this born* (the provenance trace back through the citation chain to the original) and *who has independently confirmed it* (independence meaning different methods or data, not different websites). The output is a confidence grade and — the practical part — the phrasing that honestly matches it.

## What This Skill Produces

- **The provenance trace** — the citation chain walked back to the origin: who created this claim, how, when
- **The independence assessment** — which supporting sources are actually independent vs. echoes of the same origin
- **The confidence grade** — established / single-sourced / contested / unverifiable — with reasoning
- **The repeat-it-as phrasing** — how to state the claim at its earned confidence ("one vendor survey suggests…" vs. the bare assertion)

## Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:
- **The claim, precisely** — "80% of projects fail" traced differently than "PMI found 80% of IT projects miss deadlines"; precision in the claim is precision in the trace
- **Where the user met it** — the citing source starts the chain
- **The stakes** — a deck stat, a strategy's foundation, a public claim? Depth scales: load-bearing claims get full traces; color commentary gets the quick check
- **The user's search access** — the skill directs the trace; live searching (where available) executes it — otherwise the output is the trace *plan* with the checks to run

## Framework: The Triangulation Rules

1. **Trace to the birth certificate:** follow each citation to its citation until the original appears — the survey, the paper, the filing, the dataset. The questions at the origin: who made it, with what method, what sample, when, and *with what incentive* (vendor research isn't wrong by default, but its selection pressure is part of the record).
2. **Independence is methods, not mastheads:** two outlets citing the same study = one source; a survey and a separate dataset agreeing = two. The echo test: do the supporting sources share numbers verbatim? Identical figures across "independent" sources is the fingerprint of a single origin echoing.
3. **Age and drift check:** the origin's date rides with the claim ("a 2019 survey" is a different fact in 2026), and *drift* gets caught — claims mutate through citation ("IT projects over $1M" becomes "projects"; "survey respondents" becomes "companies"). The original's precise wording vs. the circulating version is often the finding.
4. **Grade honestly, four levels:** *established* (2+ independent origins agreeing) · *single-sourced* (one origin, echoed widely — most business statistics live here) · *contested* (independent origins disagree — report the range, not your favorite) · *unverifiable* (no findable origin — the claim is folklore, however cited). The grade is the deliverable; flattering the claim helps nobody downstream.
5. **Phrase at earned confidence:** established → state it with the cite · single-sourced → attribute inline ("a 2024 Gartner survey found…") · contested → the range with both cites · unverifiable → don't repeat it, or repeat it explicitly as unsourced folklore if rhetorically necessary. The phrasing rule is what makes triangulation *usable* — it converts the grade into words.

## Output Format

# Triangulation: "[the claim]"

## The Provenance Trace
[The chain: where met → cites → … → the origin (who, method, sample, date, incentive) — or the dead end, documented]

## Independence Assessment
[Supporting sources sorted: independent (methods differ) vs. echoes (same origin) · the verbatim-number fingerprints noted]

## The Grade
**[Established / Single-sourced / Contested / Unverifiable]** — [the reasoning, including drift found between original and circulating versions]

## Repeat It As
"[The phrasing at earned confidence]" — [and the version for the deck's footnote]

## Quality Checks

- [ ] The chain was walked to an origin or an honest dead end
- [ ] Independence was judged by method/data, not by outlet count
- [ ] The origin's date and incentive are in the record
- [ ] Drift between original and circulating wording was checked
- [ ] The phrasing matches the grade — no confidence inflation in the repeat

## Anti-Patterns

- [ ] Do not count citations as confirmation — three echoes of one press release is one source with reverb
- [ ] Do not stop at a reputable citer — reputable outlets echo single sources daily; the origin is the standard
- [ ] Do not launder the grade in the phrasing — "studies show" for a single vendor survey is the exact sin
- [ ] Do not pick a side in contested claims — the range is the honest fact
- [ ] Do not repeat unverifiable claims bare — folklore travels on exactly that concession