source-audited-reportlisted

# Source-audited report Fires when drafting or revising cited reader-facing reports. Does not apply to quick research, code investigation, implementation planning, issue triage, ordinary documentation edits, or short analytical answers. Covers gathering sources, structuring sections, maintaining source quality awareness, and writing to professional editorial standards. Structured process for producing reference-quality research documents. The benchmark is professional tech journalism (Ars Technica, The Verge longform) -- sourced, specific, honest about uncertainty. ## Anti-patterns to avoid These are the most common failure modes when drafting research. Internalize them before writing a single line. ### Confident assertion without evidence Never present a claim without a source URL. Third-party blog data and primary sources are not equal -- say so when citing weaker sources. ```md <!-- Bad --> Kickstarter has over 20 million backers worldwide. <!-- Good --> Kickstarter reports "over 22 million people have backed a project" on its about page ([source](https://www.kickstarter.com/about)). ``` ### Abstraction over specificity Default to concrete examples, named entities, dates, and dollar amounts. Never write "grew fast" when you can write "crossed $1 billion in pledges by March 2014. " Never write "a thing" when you can name the thing. ### Surface-level self-critique When asked to evaluate your own draft, be adversarial. A draft that "looks competent"