gap-finderlisted

# Gap Finder ## Core Rule Every claim in a draft is one of three things: **cited**, **the author's own reasoning/data**, or **common knowledge** for this audience. **Flag everything else.** For a genuine evidence gap — a claim the argument needs but the library cannot support — the honest output is a **search direction** (what to look for: keywords, likely venues/years, a citation-chain to follow), **never a fabricated source** that pretends the gap is closed. "The argument needs evidence on horizon-scaling of hallucinated tool calls and the library has none — search ACL 2024–2025 for 'tool-call error rate task horizon'" is the right output; an invented `\cite{halluc2025}` is the failure the whole kit forbids. This is the **breadth-first** scan: *what is missing* across a whole draft, fast. It is deliberately distinct from `/claim-check`, which deep-verifies each cited claim against its source. Gap-finder finds the holes; claim-check checks the fillings. ## When to Use Invoke with `/gap-finder` when: - A full draft (or several sections) exists and you want a fast map of every uncited / unsupported claim before investing in line-by-line verification. - Early in revision — to triage where sourcing work is needed before `/claim-check` goes deep. - After heavy drafting, to catch claims that slipped in without a cite ("I'll find one later" is how fabrications enter — surface them now). - Planning a literature-search session — the gaps it emits become the queries for `/