red-team-verifier-patrick-munro

What this skill does

# Legal Red Team Verifier

## Purpose

This skill provides systematic adversarial verification of AI-generated legal content to ensure factual accuracy, proper legal citations, and appropriate disclaimers before distribution to clients or stakeholders. It addresses the #1 concern about AI in legal practice: "How do I know this is accurate?"

## When to Use This Skill

Use the Legal Red Team Verifier when User requests:
- Verification of AI-generated legal content before client/stakeholder distribution
- Fact-checking of legal snapshots, briefings, or analyses
- Quality control on compliance documents, regulatory summaries, or legal reports
- Red team review of legal outputs (e.g., "verify this", "fact-check this", "red team this document")
- Adversarial testing of legal claims or arguments

**Trigger phrases**: "verify", "fact-check", "red team", "check accuracy", "validate sources", "quality control", "is this correct", "review for errors"

## Core Verification Categories

### 1. FACTUAL ACCURACY
- **Regulatory dates and deadlines**: Verify enforcement dates, compliance deadlines, transition periods
- **Article/section references**: Confirm regulation articles, statutory sections, directive provisions exist and are cited correctly
- **Numerical data**: Validate statistics, percentages, thresholds, financial amounts
- **Entity names**: Check correct naming of agencies, authorities, organizations (e.g., BaFin, ESTI, ENISA, European Commission)
- **Timeline accuracy**: Verify historical events, legislative milestones, implementation schedules

### 2. LEGAL AUTHORITY CITATIONS
- **Primary sources**: Laws, regulations, directives (e.g., AI Act Article 6(2), GDPR Article 25, NIS2 Article 21)
- **Secondary sources**: Case law, administrative guidance, regulatory opinions
- **Citation format**: Proper legal citation standards (EUR-Lex references, official journal citations)
- **Authority hierarchy**: Ensure primary law not confused with guidance or commentary
- **Current vs. superseded**: Verify using current version, not outdated provisions

### 3. ARITHMETIC VALIDATION
- **Timeline calculations**: Independently calculate compliance deadlines from effective dates
- **Percentage calculations**: Verify mathematical accuracy of percentages, ratios, proportions
- **Financial calculations**: Check penalty calculations, cost estimates, threshold determinations
- **Logical consistency**: Ensure numbers add up across document (e.g., if mentioning "3 categories" verify exactly 3 are listed)

### 4. SOURCE VERIFICATION
- **Verifiable claims**: Every factual claim must link to a verifiable source
- **Official sources prioritized**: EUR-Lex, official gazettes, government websites, regulatory authority publications
- **No unsourced statistics**: Flag any statistical claim without attribution
- **No unsourced quotes**: Every quote must have proper attribution
- **Cross-referencing**: Critical claims verified against multiple independent sources

### 5. SPECULATION DETECTION
- **Opinion vs. fact**: Clearly distinguish editorial opinion from factual legal requirements
- **Uncertainty acknowledgment**: Identify areas where legal interpretation is unsettled or debated
- **Predictive claims**: Flag statements about future regulatory developments as speculation
- **"Likely" and "probably"**: Ensure speculative language is clearly labeled as such
- **Editorial framing**: Identify where AI has inserted interpretive framing not present in source material

### 6. DISCLAIMER ADEQUACY
- **Legal advice disclaimer**: "This is not legal advice" where appropriate
- **Jurisdiction limitations**: Clear statement of applicable jurisdiction (e.g., "Based on German/EU law")
- **Date/version disclaimer**: Document version/date of regulations cited
- **Professional consultation**: Recommendation to consult qualified legal professionals for specific situations
- **Regulatory uncertainty**: Disclosure where regulation is pending, in draft, or interpretation unclear

## Verification Methodology

### STEP 1: Initial Content Review
- Read entire document to understand scope and claims
- Identify all factual claims, legal citations, numerical data, and authoritative statements
- Note any missing sources, vague language, or unsupported assertions

### STEP 2: Source Verification (ALWAYS ONLINE)
- **MANDATORY**: Use web_search for EVERY factual claim, legal citation, and statistical assertion
- Prioritize official sources:
  - EUR-Lex (https://eur-lex.europa.eu) for EU legislation
  - Official government websites (.gov, .gov.uk, .bund.de, .europa.eu)
  - Regulatory authority sites (BaFin, ESTI, ENISA, BSI)
  - Official gazettes and legal databases
- Cross-reference critical claims across multiple sources
- Document source URLs for all verified facts

### STEP 3: Arithmetic Verification
- Independently calculate all timelines, deadlines, and dates
- Verify all percentages, ratios, and financial figures
- Check internal consistency (e.g., if document says "3 types" verify exactly 3 are listed)
- Flag any mathematical errors or inconsistencies

### STEP 4: Citation Validation
- Verify article/section numbers exist in cited regulations
- Check that citations match current versions (not superseded provisions)
- Ensure proper legal citation format
- Confirm quotes are accurate (not paraphrased but presented as quotes)

### STEP 5: Speculation Identification
- Flag any predictive statements about regulatory developments
- Identify editorial opinions presented as facts
- Note areas of legal uncertainty or debate
- Ensure speculative content is clearly labeled

### STEP 6: Disclaimer Review
- Check for legal advice disclaimers
- Verify jurisdiction is clearly stated
- Ensure date/version of regulations is specified
- Confirm recommendation for professional consultation where appropriate

## Output Structure

Provide verification results in the following structured format:

```
# LEGAL RED TEAM VERIFICATION REPORT

## Document Analyzed
[Title/description of content verified]

## Overall Assessment
**Quality Score**: [1-5 scale, 5 = distribution-ready]
**Distribution Readiness**: [READY / NEEDS REVISION / MAJOR CORRECTIONS REQUIRED]
**Critical Issues Found**: [Number]
**Verification Completed**: [Date/time]

---

## ✅ VERIFIED FACTS
[List all factual claims successfully verified with sources]
- Claim: [statement]
  Source: [official source URL]
  Status: ✅ VERIFIED

---

## ❌ ERRORS REQUIRING CORRECTION

### CRITICAL (Immediate correction required)
- **Error**: [Description of factual error, legal misstatement, or arithmetic mistake]
  **Location**: [Where in document]
  **Correction**: [What should it say]
  **Source**: [Correct source URL]

### HIGH (Correction strongly recommended)
- **Issue**: [Missing critical disclaimer, regulatory uncertainty not disclosed]
  **Impact**: [Why this matters]
  **Recommendation**: [Suggested addition/revision]

### MODERATE (Should be addressed)
- **Issue**: [Unsourced statistics, editorial framing as fact]
  **Impact**: [Credibility/accuracy concern]
  **Recommendation**: [How to improve]

### LOW (Minor improvements)
- **Issue**: [Minor inconsistencies, stylistic issues]
  **Recommendation**: [Optional enhancement]

---

## ⚠️ UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS
[Claims requiring verification or removal]
- **Claim**: [Statement made without source]
  **Status**: Could not verify through official sources
  **Action Required**: Either provide source or remove claim

---

## 📋 MISSING DISCLAIMERS
[Recommended disclaimer additions]
- **Location**: [Where to add]
  **Type**: [Legal advice / Jurisdiction / Date-version / Professional consultation]
  **Suggested Language**: [Specific disclaimer text]

---

## 🎯 DETAILED FINDINGS

### Factual Accuracy
[Detailed analysis of factual claims]

### Legal Citations
[Analysis of legal authority citations]

### Arithmetic Validation
[Analysis of numerical accuracy]

### Source Quality
[Assessment of sources used]

### Speculation & Opinion
[Analysis