Source: https://guthlabs.ai/docs/tools/citation-checks/usage/

tool / candidate

# Citation checks — usage

The distinct usage record for Citation checks. This page is proposal-only.

Status: **proposed**Lifecycle: **candidate**

## Record status

**Record ID**: tool:citation-checks

**Parent lifecycle**: candidate

**Page lane**: usage

**Lane lifecycle**: proposed

**Owner**: Tilly

**Owner role**: Pointguard and independent reviewer

**Owner status**: Not separately recorded

**Qualification result**: NOT RUN · held for evidence and human review

**Working browser surface:** [Tools — overview](<https://guthlabs.ai/labs.html#tools>) — Inspect the tool contract, usage, boundaries, and proposed qualification checks. This route is local-only; provider, credential, database, customer, publication, deployment, and production effects remain held.

## Workflow use

- Collect the source materials and associated citations

- Review evidence independently

- Reconcile supporting and conflicting evidence

- Flag contradictions without concealing them

- Record qualification findings and review provenance

- Route unresolved issues for decision before publication, funding, credential access, or source changes

## Related jobs

- Independent review

- Instrument qualification

- Evidence reconciliation

- Grant research and drafts

- Website claim review

## Field guides

- Instrument packets

- Qualification records

- Grant dossiers

- Public-claim routes

## Project contexts

- Final publication

- Funding commitments

- Credential access

- Changes to another agent's source

## Usage records

- Source citations

- Instrument packets

- Qualification records

- Grant dossiers

- Public-claim routes

- Review provenance

## Lane-specific verified instrument aids

No compatible verified instrument is admitted for the usage lane.

Compatibility here means a bounded proposal aid. It does not verify the tool, its implementation, or an external result.

## Usage boundary

This usage lane is proposal-only. Implementation, connection, qualification, deployment, publication, provider access, credentials, and authority remain unproven and held.

- The catalog name does not prove implementation, connection, qualification, deployment, or authority.

- Evidence may be incomplete, contradictory, outdated, or misapplied.

- Independent review can be undermined if the reviewer approves their own evidence.

- Draft material may be mistaken for a public claim.

- Citation review alone does not establish instrument correctness, operational availability, or authorization.

- High-consequence gates require accountable human or organizational decision-makers.

## Sources and evidence

These pointers bind the page to evidence. They do not grant authority or collapse verification into deployment.

- `source_record:tool:citation-checks`

- `agents/index.html#tilly`