gsj-product-accuracy

name

gsj-product-accuracy

description

Fact-checks Groundswell (GSJ) product and marketing copy against the approved/banned claims tracker before it ships. Use whenever GSJ copy makes a factual, health, sourcing, sustainability, packaging/compostability, or community-impact claim — health effects of ingredients (tart cherry, beet, ginger, turmeric), "clinically proven" or "guaranteed"-style wording, compostable/recyclable/eco/sustainable claims, city counts or pounds-diverted figures, farm-sourcing claims, or competitor comparisons — in emails, social captions, packaging, web, ads, or customer-service replies. Run before publishing, in addition to gsj-brand-voice. This skill governs whether a claim is substantiated; brand-voice governs how it is phrased.

Groundswell Juice Co. — product accuracy

Groundswell copy has shipped unsupported claims before — the "clinically proven" line in the cup email that legal flagged. This skill is the safety net that runs before copy goes out: it checks every factual claim against the claims tracker, so nothing ships that the brand can't back up.

The rule that makes this work: a claim is either on the approved list, on the banned list, or unverified. There is no fourth category called "sounds fine." Plausibility is never a reason to approve. If a claim isn't in the tracker, it is blocked until someone adds it with a proof source.

What this skill does, and its boundary with brand-voice

This skill answers one question about each claim: is it substantiated? — meaning it matches an approved row in the tracker, stays within that row's limits, and carries its required caveat.

It is the factual counterpart to [[gsj-brand-voice]], which governs how copy is phrased (tone, register, banned hype words, punctuation). The two overlap on a few terms — "clinically proven," "eco-friendly," "detox" are called out in both — but they judge different things: brand-voice asks does this sound like Groundswell, this skill asks can we prove it. When copy is going out, run both. A line can be perfectly on-voice and still make an unverified claim, and vice versa.

The tracker is the only authority

At the start of every review, read references/gsj-claims-tracker.md. That file (a mirror of the marketing/legal-owned gsj-claims-tracker.xlsx) is the source of truth for what is approved and what is banned. It changes over time.

• Never approve a claim from memory, or from the examples in this file. The examples below are illustrations of the process, not a substitute for reading the current tracker.
• Use references/gsj-product-facts.pdf only as supporting evidence for why a tracker row is approved (formulation, sourcing, packaging, community facts). It is not an independent approval source — a fact appearing there does not make a claim shippable unless the tracker approves it.

Process — check the copy step by step

Work through every claim in the copy in this order.

1. Extract every claim. Read the copy and list each factual assertion separately — ingredient/ health effects, sourcing, sustainability and packaging (compostable/recyclable), community-impact figures (pounds, cities, events), and any competitor comparison. Quote each one exactly. If a sentence bundles two claims, split them.

2. Match against the Approved list by meaning, not wording. Copy paraphrases; the tracker won't contain the exact sentence. Match on intent. "Beets help your blood flow" maps to A2.

3. Check for banned wording. Scan for the banned terms and close variants (B1–B5): "clinically proven," unqualified "eco-friendly"/"100% sustainable," "detox"/"cleanse," "guaranteed," "all cities compost." If matched → BANNED, and cite the reason on file from the tracker (see the next section — every ban must carry its reason).

4. Check for upgrades / overreach. An approved claim pushed past its stated limit becomes a violation. Use the tracker's "Limits" column: A1 "supports recovery" upgraded to "cures soreness" or "clinically proven" → violation; A5 "compostable in 47 of 55 cities" inflated to "compostable everywhere" or "most cities" → violation. Flag as UPGRADE/OVERREACH with the limit it broke.

5. Check required caveats. Some approvals are conditional, not standalone:

   • A6 recycling claim must be paired with the compost-coverage caveat (47 of 55).
   • A5 composting must state the specific number, never "most"/"all."
   • A4 sourcing must name the farm and location (Traverse City family farm).
   • A7's ~900 lbs figure is Riverside-only — do not apply it to any other city. A claim missing its required caveat is NEEDS CAVEAT, not approved as written.

6. Anything unmatched → UNVERIFIED (hard block). If a claim matches no approved row, it cannot ship — regardless of how reasonable it sounds. Do not approve because it "seems fine" or "is probably true." Emit the exact tracker row that would need to be added: the claim, and what proof source would be required to approve it. Approving it is the job of marketing/legal updating the tracker, not of this review.

7. Confirm every ban carries its reason. Each BANNED finding must cite the reason-on-file from the tracker. If you believe a claim should be banned but no reason is recorded in the tracker, flag the tracker as incomplete rather than asserting the ban unsupported — the requirement is symmetric: no ban without a reason, no approval without a proof source.

Verdict for each claim

Assign exactly one:

• APPROVED — matches an approved row, within limits, caveat present (or none required).
• APPROVED — WITH REQUIRED CAVEAT — approved only once the missing caveat is added; state which.
• NEEDS CAVEAT — same as above when the caveat is simply absent from the copy.
• UPGRADE/OVERREACH — based on an approved claim but pushed past its limit; state the limit.
• BANNED — matches a banned row; cite the reason on file. Give the in-voice replacement.
• UNVERIFIED — cannot ship — on neither list; emit the tracker row that would need to be added.

Output format

Return a per-claim table:

Quoted claim	Verdict	Tracker row / proof source	Required fix

Then a one-line gate: SHIPS (all claims approved) or DOES NOT SHIP, followed by the list of blockers (every BANNED, UPGRADE/OVERREACH, NEEDS CAVEAT, and UNVERIFIED item).

Do not invent proof

Never fabricate a proof source, a number, a farm, or a city count to make a claim passable. This mirrors the brand-voice invented-fact rule: a fabricated specific is worse than an honest gap, because the brand's credibility rests on its specifics being real. An unknown specific is UNVERIFIED, not a guess.

Known gaps to watch (blind spots)

• Golden Hour has no tracker rows. Any health claim about it (turmeric, mango, pineapple) is automatically UNVERIFIED until marketing adds approved rows. This will recur — flag it every time rather than reasoning from general knowledge about turmeric.
• Facts are time-bound. "47 of 55 cities, as of this spring" and "~900 lbs last year" drift. If copy restates a figure, confirm it against the current tracker/product-facts dates; a number that was right last quarter can be stale now.
• Location generalization. Riverside's partner (Riverside Conservation Group) and its figure are city-specific. Do not let copy apply either to another location — confirm per city.
• Approved ≠ unconditional. Several approvals only hold with their caveat (steps 4–5). A bare version of an approved claim is not automatically shippable.