MethodPublished

Tool Capability Verification Method

Tool profile should expose evidence state beside claim instead of collapsing every source into one confidence score.

Written by
Marketing Wiki Editors
Reviewed by
Marketing Wiki Editors
Published
Updated
Evidence checked
Sources
2
Direct answer

Claim-level method for separating official documentation, observed behavior, inference, stale evidence, contradiction, and unknowns.

Capability claim needs source, source type, verification date, and status. This method avoids treating vendor documentation and independent observation as equivalent.

Evidence classes#

Scroll table →
ClassMeaningAllowed wording
OfficialVendor or publisher documents capability"Documentation says..."
ObservedReproducible dated test produced result"Our test produced..."
InferredEvidence supports conclusion indirectly"Evidence suggests..."
StaleSource or test exceeds refresh window"Last verified..."
ContradictedSources or tests disagreeDescribe conflict
UnknownEvidence cannot answer questionState unknown

Claim record#

statement: product exports editable email HTML
source_url: https://example.com/docs/export
source_type: official-documentation
verified_at: 2026-08-10
status: vendor-documented
reviewer: contributor-id

Observed test adds input, account tier, product version, environment, expected result, output, and repetition count.

Freshness#

Refresh interval follows volatility. Pricing and model assignment change faster than company founding date. Do not update visible date unless evidence or wording changed.

Conflicts#

When official pages disagree, show conflict. Do not silently select more favorable source. When observed test contradicts documentation, preserve both and describe test boundary.

Affiliations#

Every profile records submitter and reviewer relationship to subject. Affiliation does not disqualify contribution, but it must remain visible and should not control final comparative conclusion.

Output#

Method produces inspectable claim ledger. Readers and agents can filter official, observed, inferred, stale, contradicted, and unknown statements without relying on opaque editorial score.

Evidence

Sources behind this page

Claims remain tied to dated source review. Method and corrections stay public.

  1. S-01NIST AI Risk Management Frameworknist.gov
  2. S-02Google people-first content guidancedevelopers.google.com