Practice Orientation Audit

---
name: practice-orientation-audit
description: On explicit request, check a matter-orientation account against authorized sources and report accuracy, quality, observed efficiency, gaps and corrections. Read-only and descriptive.
---

# Orientation claim check

This optional instruction module is read through the workflow catalog. It is a
conversational/document procedure, not an installed host skill or executable
audit. Use only when the lawyer expressly requests an orientation claim check.
Read [scope and authority](../../workflows/scope-and-authority.md) and
[source verification](../../workflows/source-verification.md).

For bounded source retrieval, follow the active host's installed owning skill
and installed references after the catalog's dependency check. Shared source
skill links describe the prose contract; they do not supply configured commands.

## Choose the evidence

Freeze the account being checked and identify the requested claims, review
cutoff and sources. Use supplied material, or real matter sources only when
their retrieval is expressly authorized for this audit. A neutral fictional
demonstration is an optional alternative when requested; it establishes no
real-file result. Use source/document review only; this module supplies no
technical reliability or performance measurement.

If retrieval is authorized, resolve the exact matter through the existing
matter workflow and use only its bounded read mechanisms. Do not broaden a
query or treat unavailable mail, unreviewed attachments or a partial brief as
complete evidence. No memory/checkpoint, register or account changes are made
by this audit; underlying intake writes require separate scope and authority.

## Check the account

1. Separate factual assertions, recorded decisions, live obligations, advice,
   dates, audience/delivery statements and recommended actions.
2. For each material assertion, locate controlling source passages and compare
   the account with their exact meaning and current temporal state. A memory
   summary is a pointer; later evidence may supersede it. Check both supporting
   and contradictory evidence within the agreed scope.
3. Distinguish document execution, transmission, delivery, filing/service and
   substantive completion. None is proved by another state without appropriate
   source evidence. Preserve uncertain legal inputs and live protective items.
4. Classify each claim as supported, contradicted, partially supported or
   unverifiable in this scope. Record source locators, the reason, needed
   correction or missing evidence, and effect on the recommended next action.
5. When the user has authorized an independent check and a same-provider
   read-only reviewer is actually available, give it the same frozen account,
   bounded sources and claim questions. Report reviewer identity and scope.
   A second pass in this same thread is self-review, not independent review.
   Missing delegation is disclosed and does not become fabricated review.

## Assess quality and observed efficiency

Report quality separately from claim accuracy. Within the reviewed sources,
identify material omissions, whether the proposed next action is specific and
usable, whether its owner and protective consequence are clear, and whether
uncertainty and unavailable evidence are honestly stated. An accurate account
may still omit a live obligation or fail to tell the lawyer what to do next.

Assess efficiency only from the supplied or authorized visible work record.
Identify observed unnecessary retrieval, repeated retrieval of unchanged
sources, or repeated completed work, with the actual source coverage and why a
refresh was or was not needed. Report coverage-preserving improvements without
inventing token, timing, cost or performance measurements. If the work record is
missing, observed efficiency is unassessed; a concise account alone proves
nothing about the work required to produce it.

## Deliver

Lead with material corrections and unresolved protective obligations. Include a
compact claim/source/status/correction table, source coverage and omissions,
separate quality and observed-efficiency assessments, and a corrected account
only when the sources support it. Mark recommended
record changes as proposals routed to the owning workflow after exact approval.
Do not infer runtime reliability from this exercise or call an account fully
verified when its relevant sources were unavailable. This workflow sends,
saves, publishes and changes nothing.