| name | citation-check |
| description | Verify citations in AI-generated or human-written text against the local knowledge base and external APIs. Catches hallucinated references, wrong metadata, and missing papers. Use when the user wants to check if citations are real and accurate. |
Citation Verification
Check whether citations in text are real and accurate — prevents AI-hallucinated references and metadata errors.
Important context: Roughly 40% of citations in AI-generated academic text may be hallucinated (fabricated papers, misattributed authorship, assembled metadata). Even human-written text frequently contains year/journal errors. The goal of this skill is to eliminate all citation problems before submission.
Prerequisites
The user provides text to check (pasted inline, a file path, or a draft file in a workspace).
If a workspace is available, validation is preferentially scoped to it.
Execution Logic
1. Extract Citations
Extract all citations from the text, recognizing these formats:
(Author, Year) / Author (Year) — parenthetical citations\cite{key} / \citep{key} / \citet{key} — LaTeX citations[N] — numbered citations (require a reference list)
2. Verify Each Citation
Apply a three-layer check to every citation:
Layer 1 — Local library match
autor search-author "<Author>" --top 5
autor search "<keywords from title>" --top 5
After finding a match in the local library, verify: author names, year, title, and journal are consistent.
Layer 2 — DOI / metadata cross-check
If a match exists in the local library, read the DOI and detailed metadata from meta.json for cross-validation.
If no local match is found, flag the citation — it is not in the workspace/knowledge base.
Layer 3 — Content consistency
For key citations (those supporting core claims), load L2–L3:
autor show <dir_name> --level 3
Verify: does the text's description of the paper match the paper's actual content? Is there over-interpretation or selective quotation? If L3 is inferred_synthesis, use it as a triage signal and verify high-stakes claims against L4/source text.
3. Output Report
Generate a verification report with a status label for every citation:
| Status | Meaning |
|---|
| VERIFIED | Found in local library with consistent metadata |
| METADATA MISMATCH | Paper found but author/year/title differs |
| NOT IN LIBRARY | Paper not present in the local library |
| CONTENT MISMATCH | Paper content does not match the in-text description |
| SUSPICIOUS | Cannot be verified; likely a hallucinated citation |
Provide specific correction suggestions for each problematic citation.
Common Problem Patterns
- AI hallucination: an author name and year are combined to produce a non-existent paper — flag as SUSPICIOUS
- Misattribution: a real paper is cited but the text describes a different paper — flag as CONTENT MISMATCH
- Metadata error: year off by one, journal name misspelled, wrong first author — flag as METADATA MISMATCH and provide the correct value
- Over-citation: a single claim backed by 5+ citations that are mostly tangential — suggest trimming
Examples
User says: "Check whether the citations in this passage are correct."
→ Extract citations, search for each in the local library, output verification report
User says: "Check citations in workspace/my-paper/introduction.md."
→ Read the file, extract citations, verify within workspace scope
