To run this task you must have the following required information:

> Claim or statement to verify

If you don't have all of this information, exit here and respond asking for any extra information you require, and instructions to run this task again with ALL required information.

---

You MUST use a todo list to complete these steps in order. Never move on to one step if you haven't completed the previous step. If you have multiple CONSECUTIVE read steps in a row, read them all at once (in parallel). Otherwise, do not read a file until you reach that step.

Add all steps to your todo list now and begin executing.

## Steps

1. [Read Fact-Checking Guide]: Read the documentation in: `skills/sauna/[skill_id]/references/research.factcheck.guide.md`

2. [Read Research Topics]: Discover relevant information in the user's filesystem at `documents/knowledge/research/topics/*.md`. (Check if this topic has been researched before)

3. Review any existing research on this topic.
If found, reference it to save time and ensure consistency.

Parse the claim. First check for special cases per the guide:
- SATIRE: From The Onion, Babylon Bee, etc.? Use 🎭 SATIRE verdict.
- CONTEXT-DEPENDENT: Jurisdiction-specific? Ask for location. Time-sensitive? Note date.

Then identify: core claim, verifiable elements (stats, quotes, events), and context (source, when made, what's missing).


4. Assess each verifiable element:

For statistics:
- What's the original source?
- Is the methodology sound?
- Is it current or outdated?
- Is it being presented accurately (not cherry-picked)?

For quotes:
- Search for debunking FIRST: "did [person] actually say [quote]"
- Check Quote Investigator, Wikiquote "Misattributed" sections
- Find the earliest documented occurrence
- Red flags: too-perfect phrasing, no primary source, suspiciously modern

For events/facts:
- What do authoritative sources say?
- Is there consensus or dispute?
- What's the evidence quality?

For popular beliefs (potential myths):
- Search "[claim] myth" or "[claim] debunked"
- Check Snopes, academic sources
- Be skeptical of claims with round numbers or counterintuitive hooks


5. Provide a verdict:

RATING
- ✅ TRUE — Claim is accurate as stated
- ⚠️ MOSTLY TRUE — Accurate but missing context
- ❓ MIXED — Some elements true, some false
- ⚠️ MOSTLY FALSE — Core claim is wrong but has grain of truth
- ❌ FALSE — Claim is inaccurate
- 🔍 UNVERIFIABLE — Cannot be confirmed with available information
- 🎭 SATIRE — Content is from a satirical source

CONFIDENCE
- High: Multiple reliable sources agree
- Medium: Limited sources or some ambiguity
- Low: Conflicting sources or weak evidence

EXPLANATION
- What's accurate and what's not
- Key sources supporting the verdict
- Important context or nuance


6. If this was a significant fact-check (not trivial), save to `documents/knowledge/research/topics/*.md`
(filename: fact-topic-slug.md):
- Claim verified
- Verdict and confidence
- Key sources
- Date checked

This builds a verified facts reference.