name: Hallucination Red-Team
description: "Use when stress-testing draft legal work product for hallucination risk by separating factual claims, legal claims, cited authorities, user-provided information, model-generated information, unsupported claims, uncertainty, and safer revisions."
practice_area: legal-methodology
task_type: verification
jurisdictions: []
risk_level: high
requires_attorney_review: true
inputs:
- "The complete draft legal output to red-team"
- "The user-provided facts, source documents, and cited authorities"
- "The intended use and audience of the output"
outputs:
- "Hallucination risk report"
- "Safer revised version or not-ready finding"
related_skills:
- skills/legal-methodology/red-team-verifier/SKILL.md
- skills/legal-methodology/citation-integrity-check/SKILL.md
- skills/legal-methodology/source-validation/SKILL.md
tags:
- legal-methodology
- hallucination-check
- red-team
- unsupported-claims
- verification
Hallucination Red-Team
Purpose
Force a draft legal output to account for every factual claim, legal claim, cited authority, user-provided fact, model-generated statement, unsupported claim, and uncertainty marker. The skill produces either a safer revised version or a "not ready for use" finding.
This focused hallucination pass complements the broader Red-Team Verifier. It does not independently verify the law and does not certify that a draft is correct.
Use When
- A draft contains legal claims, factual claims, citations, quotations, or confident conclusions that may be unsupported.
- A user asks for a hallucination check, unsupported-claim audit, or safer revised version.
- A draft will be sent externally, filed, used in a client communication, or relied on for a high-risk decision.
- A model produced the draft without a clear claim/source table.
- The complete draft to red-team.
- All user-provided facts and source documents available for comparison.
- Any cited authorities, research notes, or source lists.
- The intended use and recipient.
If the draft is missing, stop and request it. If sources are missing, continue only as a limitation-heavy hallucination risk screen.
Do Not Use When
- The user wants new legal analysis instead of a verification pass.
- The output has no claims to audit.
- The user asks for a final certification that no hallucinations exist.
Legal Safety Rules
- Produce draft legal work product for attorney review. This is not legal advice.
- Do not claim the absence of hallucinations. State only what was checked and what remains unresolved.
- Do not invent sources, facts, citations, or safer substitute law.
- Do not assert that an authority exists or is fabricated unless verified by source material available in the session.
- Preserve privilege and confidentiality.
Workflow
- Segment the draft. Break the draft into discrete factual claims, legal claims, citations, quotations, assumptions, recommendations, and conclusions.
- Classify information origin. For each item, mark whether it is user-provided, source-provided, model-generated, inferred, or unclear.
- Inventory authorities. List every authority, citation, quotation, source URL, statute, rule, case, regulation, or guidance reference.
- Flag unsupported claims. Mark claims with no source, insufficient source support, contradicted source support, unclear origin, or overbroad phrasing.
- Flag authority risks. Mark invented-looking or unverifiable authorities, missing pin cites, jurisdiction mismatch, outdated authority risk, and unsupported legal propositions.
- Mark uncertainty. Add or recommend
[CONFIRM: ...], [VERIFY: ...], [citation needed], [pin cite needed], [verify jurisdiction], and [deadline verification required] markers where needed. - Decide readiness. If material unsupported claims, authority risks, or missing gates remain, mark "not ready for use." Otherwise mark "ready for attorney review," not final use.
- Revise safely. Produce a safer revised version only where the revision removes overclaiming, labels uncertainty, or narrows to supported facts. Do not supply missing law.
Deliver:
- Draft Label — "Draft legal work product for attorney review. Not legal advice."
- Readiness Finding — Ready for attorney review / Not ready for use, with reasons.
- Claim-Origin Table
| # | Claim | Type | Origin | Support status | Risk | Required action |
|---|
- Authority Risk Table
| Authority | Use in draft | Verification status | Hallucination risk | Required action |
|---|
- Unsupported Claims List
- Uncertainty Markers To Add
- Safer Revised Version — Or "No safe revision without additional sources/attorney judgment."
- Attorney Verification Checklist
Attorney Verification Checklist
- [ ] Every factual claim is traced to user-provided or source-provided material, or is marked as unsupported.
- [ ] Every legal claim is supported by verified authority or flagged for attorney research.
- [ ] Every cited authority and quotation has been independently checked.
- [ ] Model-generated claims have been removed, sourced, or marked for verification.
- [ ] Jurisdiction and deadline gaps are resolved or visibly flagged.
- [ ] The revised draft does not present unsupported analysis as settled law.
- [ ] The output is ready for attorney review only; it has not been treated as final.