Claims, evidence, and cross-links are how Agent Guide stays honest: summaries tell agents the headline; links and the sources of truth registry tell them where to verify. This doc covers strategy, types, and worked examples — especially marketplace and review URLs.
Four layers of truth
| Layer | What it is | Agent should… | |-------|------------|---------------| | Sources of truth | Declared registry (sources_of_truth[]) | Read these first for narrative and proof | | Summary | Short description, positioning bullets | Paraphrase carefully; follow registry | | Claim | Asserted fact with status | Repeat only if supported | | Evidence / source link | URL or CMS ref with proof | Follow link to verify |
Rule: Don’t paste marketplace review text into Agent Guide. Store the claim (“Highly rated on Amazon”) + link to the listing + optional rating/count metadata.
Sources of truth vs product cross-links
| Registry | Scope | When to use | |----------|-------|-------------| | sources_of_truth[] | Site-wide canonical reading list | About pages, primary website, key docs, proof archives | | Product sources[] | Per-offering detail links | Product page, marketplace listing, docs, purchase URL |
Both export resolved URLs. The registry sets global reading order; product sources set offering-specific depth.
Registry entry example
{
"id": "truth_about",
"type": "cms_entry",
"role": "narrative",
"label": "About us",
"url": "https://example.com/pages/about",
"ref": {
"collection": "pages",
"entry_id": "about",
"slug": "about",
"label": "About us",
"ref_type": "entry"
},
"priority": 80,
"link_status": "ok"
}
Claims
Writing good claims
Good claims are:
- Specific — “ISO 27001 certified since 2023” not “very secure”
- Checkable — You can point to evidence or a proof source
- Bounded — Time, geography, audience where relevant
Bad claims:
- Pure opinion without qualification
- Superlatives you can’t prove (“best in the world”)
- Forward-looking guarantees without disclaimer
Status workflow
pending_review → (evidence added, reviewed) → supported
↓
unsupported / expired / conflicting
Public export and view=summary only include supported claims.
Claim sources vs evidence
| Mechanism | When to use | |-----------|-------------| | evidence[] + evidence_ids | Reusable proof documents shared across claims | | claim.sources[] | Direct URLs tied only to this claim |
Example: Claim “Featured in TechCrunch 2025” → one evidence row with publication URL. Claim “4.8★ on Amazon” → evidence type marketplace_listing + URL; optional rating 4.8, review_count 1200.
Consider adding a proof role source in the registry when the same certification page supports multiple claims.
Evidence
Evidence types (reference)
| Type | Typical URL | |------|-------------| | cms_content | Resolved public CMS entry URL | | external_url | Any allowed HTTPS page | | marketplace_listing | amazon.com/dp/…, App Store, Etsy | | review_platform | G2, Trustpilot, Capterra | | certification | Issuer badge or certificate page | | publication | News article, paper | | upload | Internal — prefer public URL when possible |
Verification
- user_verified — Editor confirmed link matches claim
- unverified — Default for new evidence
Use Verify in admin after checking the page live.
Link health
Check all links (Overview) performs safe external HEAD requests:
| link_status | Meaning | |-------------|---------| | ok | 2xx/3xx response | | redirect | Final URL differs — may update on check | | broken | 4xx/5xx or network failure | | unknown | Not checked yet | | blocked | SSRF-safe filter rejected URL |
Staleness: Evidence URLs not verified in 180 days trigger publish warnings.
SSRF safety
Admin URL fetch and link check block localhost, private IPs, non-HTTP schemes. Only public HTTPS/HTTP URLs.
Cross-links (product sources)
Source link shape
Each product source link has:
{
"id": "src_abc",
"role": "canonical_detail",
"type": "cms_entry",
"label": "Widget Pro — product page",
"url": "https://example.com/products/widget-pro",
"ref": {
"collection": "products",
"entry_id": "entry_123",
"slug": "widget-pro",
"label": "Widget Pro"
},
"link_status": "ok",
"last_verified_at": "2026-07-27T10:00:00+00:00"
}
CMS entries without stored URL get resolved on publish from collection + slug + public site base.
Product source roles
| Role | Purpose | |------|---------| | canonical_detail | Authoritative full detail | | reference | General background | | marketplace | Where to buy / listing | | review | Reviews and ratings | | docs | Specs, API docs, manuals | | proof | Supports a specific assertion | | purchase | Checkout/pricing | | social | Social profile |
Worked example — Amazon reviews
Goal: Agents can say you’re well-reviewed without hallucinating review text.
- Registry: Optional
marketplacesource with roleprooffor the listing. - Claim: “Consistently rated 4.5+ stars on Amazon US”
- Evidence:
- type: marketplace_listing - url: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0XXXXXX - rating: 4.7 - review_count: 842 - verification: user_verified after manual check
- Do not scrape or paste review bodies into Agent Guide
- Republish when rating changes materially — set calendar reminder
Worked example — B2B SaaS
- Sources: CMS About entry (
narrative), pricing page (reference), security whitepaper (proof) - Products: Plan names with canonical links to
/pricinganchors - Claims: “SOC 2 Type II certified” → evidence type certification → auditor page
- Claims: “Listed on G2 with 4.8 rating” → review_platform URL
Completeness interaction
- Sources: need narrative source for full 15 pts
- Products: need grounded source for full 10 pts
- Evidence: need URL for full 15 pts
- Claims: need supported + evidence_ids for full 20 pts
Use completeness as quality gate, not checkbox filling.
Public export & JSON-LD
Published exports include resolved sources_of_truth[] and product sources[]. Supported claims in graph views include linked_evidence. JSON-LD adds:
- Product
url,sameAsfrom sources - Claim
isBasedOnfrom evidence URLs
See Public API.