purge-hallucinations

name	purge-hallucinations
description	Verify and purge fake citations.
user-invocable	true
allowed-tools	["Bash","Read","Edit","Write"]

purge-hallucinations — verify references resolve, then purge the fakes

LLM-written content (memories, skills, CLAUDE.md, code, docs, PR descriptions) drifts into hallucinations: concrete references that read as authoritative but don't resolve to anything real. This skill checks each checkable reference against ground truth and, for every one proven fabricated, proposes a fix interactively.

The prime directive: only purge what you can prove is fake. A reference you can't verify (network down, ambiguous symbol, private resource) is unverifiable, not a hallucination — report it, never silently delete it.

When this fires

• "purge hallucinations", "ph", "check for hallucinations", "fact-check this"
• "verify the references", "find made-up / fabricated references"
• "does everything in this file actually exist", "what did you make up"
• "audit my memories/skills for stale references"
• Proactively when reviewing AI-generated text/code that asserts concrete, checkable facts (file names, function names, versions, links, citations) — especially memory and instruction files, which compound errors over time.

Step 1 — Resolve the target

Pick the narrowest target the user named, in this precedence order:

1. Explicit target — a file, a directory, a PR diff, or pasted AI output the user pointed at. For a PR: gh pr diff <n> (local) or mcp__github__pull_request_read method: get_diff (remote/web — see memories/github-mcp-tools.md); audit only the references the diff introduces.
2. The memory/instruction corpus — the ai-config repo's memories/, skills/, and CLAUDE.md. Find the repo root with git -C ~/.claude/skills/purge-hallucinations rev-parse --show-toplevel.
3. The current repo's code & docs — when the user says "this repo" or names no target while inside a project.

If the target is genuinely ambiguous, ask once; otherwise proceed with the narrowest reasonable reading and state which you chose.

Step 2 — Extract concrete, checkable references

Scan the target for references that have a definite right/wrong answer. Ignore prose, opinions, and design rationale — those aren't hallucinations, just claims. Pull out, with file + line for each:

Reference type	Examples
File / path	src/foo.R, here("data/x.csv"), a relative link in a .qmd
Function / object / symbol	pkg::fn(), an R object, a shell command, a Make target
Action ref + version	uses: org/action@v3, @<sha>, a tag/release
Skill name	~/.claude/skills/<name>/, a /slash-command
Memory cross-link	[[some-memory-name]] in a memory body
URL / link	https://…, a docs anchor, a badge target
Citation / package	a CRAN/Bioconductor package, a DOI, a DESCRIPTION dep
Flag / option / config key	a CLI flag, an env var, a YAML key the schema defines
API / SDK method or model id	an SDK method, a model name, an endpoint

Step 3 — Verify each against ground truth

Use the cheapest check that proves existence or absence. Match the tool to the reference type:

• File / path — test -e <path>, git ls-files -- <path>, ls.
• Function / object — grep for the definition, not just a mention (grep -rn "fn <- function" R/); for an exported R fn check NAMESPACE / Rscript -e 'library(pkg); exists("fn")'. Shell command — command -v.
• Action ref + version — confirm the tag/SHA exists (gh api repos/<org>/<repo>/git/refs/tags/<tag> or .../commits/<sha>).
• Skill name — ls skills/<name>/ in the local ai-config directory. If not found locally, check the session's available-skills list (appears in system reminders) before classifying as ❌; a globally-available system skill with no local directory is ❓ Unverifiable, not ❌ Fabricated.
• Memory cross-link — [[target]] links resolve to skill directories (ls skills/<target>/); if no matching skill, search memory headings (grep -rn "^# .*<target>" memories/).
• URL / link — curl -sSI -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' <url> (local) or WebFetch (remote). A 404/410 is fabricated; a timeout, 403, 429, or DNS failure is unverifiable — distinguish them.
• Citation / package — CRAN: https://cran.r-project.org/package=<pkg>; installed: Rscript -e 'find.package("<pkg>")'; dep: check DESCRIPTION.
• Flag / option / config key — grep the tool's --help, its schema, or its source; for a YAML key, the consuming code/schema.
• API / SDK method or model id — check the SDK source/docs. For Claude/Anthropic specifics (model ids, params), defer to the claude-api skill rather than guessing.

Sort every reference into exactly one bucket:

Bucket	Meaning	Disposition
✅ Resolves	proven to exist	leave it
❌ Fabricated	proven absent (404, no definition, no such tag/file)	propose a fix (Step 4)
❓ Unverifiable	can't be checked here (network, private, ambiguous)	report, do not edit

When in doubt, it's ❓ not ❌. False deletions are worse than a flagged maybe.

Step 4 — Propose a fix for each fabrication (interactive)

Default action is propose, then apply on confirmation — never bulk-edit silently. For each ❌, present: the reference, where it is, the evidence it's fake, and a proposed fix — exactly one of:

1. Correct it — when a real target is an obvious near-match (typo, moved path, renamed symbol, bumped version). Show the before→after. Prefer this over deletion when a true referent clearly exists (grep/gh for the nearest real name).
2. Remove it — when the reference is wholly invented and removing it leaves the sentence/code correct.
3. Rewrite around it — when removal would leave a dangling clause or broken code; restate without the fake reference.

Apply each fix only after the user confirms (batch obvious typo-corrections together if the user prefers). Re-verify after editing. If the target is a memory or instruction file, the global "verify before recommending" rule is the reason this matters — a fabricated memory poisons every future session.

Step 5 — Report

Summarize: N references checked → ✅ resolved, ❌ fixed (list before→after), ❓ unverifiable (list, with why each couldn't be checked). The ❓ list is a feature, not a failure — it tells the user exactly what still needs a human eyeball.

Custom agent for the detect phase

Steps 1--3 (resolve target, extract references, verify against ground truth) have no need for Edit/Write access. Delegate them to the hallucination-detector custom agent (.claude/agents/hallucination-detector.md) for a hard, harness-enforced guarantee against Edit/Write tool use before the report in Step 4 is reviewed --- tighter than this skill's own instruction-only discipline, though the agent retains Bash for read-only checks, so avoiding a write-capable shell command is still instruction-level. Run Step 4 (propose/apply fixes) in the main session afterward.

Relationship to other skills

• record-learnings, ums, memorize / remember — these write the memory/skill/instruction corpus; purge-hallucinations audits it. A natural hand-off: after a big memory/skills write, run this to catch fabricated cross-links and stale paths.
• claude-api — the source of truth for Claude/Anthropic model ids and params; defer to it instead of guessing when verifying those references.
• simplify / tidy — clean structure (dead code, redundancy); this cleans truth (references that don't resolve). Complementary passes.
• reprexes — if verifying a code reference needs actually running it, isolate it as a reprex first.
• check-rendered-refs / crr — the output-side counterpart. This skill audits source references; crr scans rendered HTML for crossrefs/citations that broke at render time and leaked into the page as ?@key. Hand a ?@key hit here to trace the dangling key back to its source line.
• check-info-quality / ciq — this skill checks whether a reference exists; ciq's check C checks whether an existing, real reference actually supports the claim it's attached to. A citation can pass here and still fail ciq if it resolves but doesn't say what the text claims.

Anti-patterns

• ❌ Deleting an unverifiable reference as if it were proven fake — the cardinal sin. Network/permission failures are ❓, not ❌.
• ❌ Flagging prose, opinions, or design rationale — only concrete, checkable references are in scope.
• ❌ Confirming a symbol exists by finding a mention of it rather than its definition.
• ❌ Bulk-editing without proposing fixes first (default is interactive).
• ❌ Treating a network 403/429/timeout the same as a 404.
• ❌ Guessing whether a Claude/Anthropic model id or param is real instead of deferring to claude-api.