| name | fact-checker |
| description | Verify technical accuracy of Azure documentation using official Microsoft sources. Offers seven workflows: quick in-place fact-check, full standalone report, internal-source verification, freshness review, deep agent-driven check, research-only investigation, and customer incident analysis. All workflows use a tiered source authority hierarchy prioritizing learn.microsoft.com. |
| argument-hint | Describe what to verify — e.g., 'fact-check this article', 'freshness review', 'research Azure Front Door caching', 'CIA analysis for App Service' |
| user-invocable | true |
Fact-Checker Skill
Verify and validate technical claims in Azure documentation against official Microsoft sources, using a structured authority hierarchy and reproducible workflows.
Choose Your Workflow
Decision Guide
- "Just fix this article" → Workflow 1 (Quick In-Place)
- "Audit this article and give me a report" → Workflow 2 (Full Report)
- "Check against internal docs too" → Workflow 3 (Internal + Public)
- "Is this article still current?" → Workflow 4 (Freshness + Fact)
- "Do a deep verification of every claim" → Workflow 5 (Deep Agent)
- "Research topic X with sources" → Workflow 6 (Research Only)
- "Analyze customer incidents for Service Y" → Workflow 7 (CIA Analysis)
Source Authority Hierarchy
All workflows use a tiered system. Always prefer the highest available tier.
Public Sources (all workflows)
| Tier | Source | Use For |
|---|
| 1 — Primary | learn.microsoft.com, azure.microsoft.com | Product names, features, configs, limits, pricing, official guidance |
| 2 — Secondary | techcommunity.microsoft.com, devblogs.microsoft.com, GitHub repos (REST specs, SDKs, CLI) | Announcements, updates, API schemas, code examples |
| 3 — Tertiary | developer.microsoft.com, code.visualstudio.com | Platform docs, Graph API, VS Code |
| 4 — Community | Microsoft Q&A (official responses), Stack Overflow (verified MS employees) | Clarifications, edge cases, engineer-answered Q&A |
Internal Sources (Workflow 3 and 6 only)
| Tier | Source | Use For |
|---|
| 5 | Internal documentation (SharePoint, wikis) | Design specs, feature internals |
| 6 | Internal codebases & config files | Default values, flags, implementation truth |
| 7 | Internal product metadata & catalogs | Service names, SKUs, API versions, availability |
Rule: Internal sources are never cited in public-facing documentation. Internal findings must be isolated in a clearly marked confidential section.
See references/source-hierarchy.md for the complete source reference table.
Core Workflow Steps
All verification workflows follow this general pattern (specific workflows may add or modify steps):
Step 1 — Identify Claims
- Extract every verifiable technical claim from the article
- Include: service names, feature availability, configuration values, CLI/API commands, pricing, limits, version numbers, dates, URLs
- Resolve
[!INCLUDE ...] references and check included content too (Workflow 1 especially)
Step 2 — Verify Against Sources
- Search official sources using the tiered hierarchy
- Fetch full pages (don't rely on search snippets alone)
- For each claim, record: source URL, tier, verification status, and evidence
Step 3 — Assess Accuracy
Classify each claim:
- Accurate — Matches current official documentation
- Partially Accurate — Mostly correct but needs minor update
- Inaccurate — Contradicts official sources
- Outdated — Was correct but superseded by newer information
- Unverifiable — No authoritative source found (flag, don't remove)
- Unverifiable (Public) — Only verifiable via internal sources (Workflow 3)
Step 4 — Apply Corrections
- Edit the file directly with corrections (Workflows 1–5)
- Update
ms.date in frontmatter to today's date
- Never remove content that can't be verified — flag it instead
- Internal-source corrections: flag for author review, don't apply directly
Step 5 — Report Results
- Present findings with per-item details: what changed, why, evidence source
- Generate report file if required by the workflow
- List all sources consulted
See references/workflows.md for detailed per-workflow procedures.
Accuracy Classification Table
| Status | Meaning | Action |
|---|
| ✅ Accurate | Matches official docs | No change needed |
| ⚠️ Partially Accurate | Minor discrepancy | Edit with correction |
| ❌ Inaccurate | Contradicts official source | Edit with correction + cite source |
| 🕐 Outdated | Superseded by newer info | Update to current + cite source |
| ❓ Unverifiable | No authoritative source | Flag in report; do not remove |
Quality Checklist
Before completing any workflow, confirm:
Prompt Assets
The prompt and agent files for each workflow live in the repo-level directories:
