kaozheng

name	kaozheng
description	Use when a historical paper or final draft needs evidential scrutiny: warrants, citations, source rank, truncation risk, or argument structure must be audited rather than stylistically interpreted.

kaozheng

The work this skill is for

This is not typo-catching. That is proofread.

kaozheng reads in the Qian-Jia evidential tradition: not asking whether the paper sounds plausible, but whether its evidentiary bridge bears weight. The source may be real and the bridge still false. A citation may be accurate and still be pressed into service beyond what it can support.

What it audits

For a post-OCR, post-proofread paper, test:

• whether the claim is actually supported by the data cited
• whether quotations are complete enough to preserve original sense
• whether cited authorities are first-rank, second-rank, or hearsay
• whether the warrant is visible and defensible
• whether the paper leans on a solitary witness (孤证不立)

Input

Target: $ARGUMENTS

• workspace directory → read <ws>/final.md
• .md file → read it directly
• empty → ask what to read

If only raw.md exists, note that the text has not yet been proofread and mark the report accordingly.

Method

Read the argument in layers:

1. Extract the paper's main claims.
2. Pair each claim with its offered evidence.
3. Identify the warrant that connects the two.
4. Audit quotations and citation framing:
   • what is quoted
   • what is omitted
   • what rank the source holds
   • whether a footnote quietly carries more force than the body text
5. Flag cardinal errors first; breadth comes second.

The framework is a scale, not a blade. Do not deform the paper merely to force it into Toulmin language.

Output

• workspace mode → <workspace>/analysis/{stem}_kaozheng.md
• single-file mode → analysis/{stem}_kaozheng.md

Report structure:

1. Argument skeleton — claim / data / warrant / backing / qualifier / rebuttal
2. Citation audit table — original fragment → suspected source → verifiable? → truncated?
3. Cardinal errors — one to three, ranked by severity, with repair suggestions
4. Suspicious but unverified — handed off for further checking

Guardrails

• Never modify the source text.
• Do not confuse disagreement with disproof.
• One decisive structural error outweighs twenty decorative observations.
• If verification is impossible from available material, mark it as unverified rather than pretending certainty.