Use cases
The common thread: something is about to be published, sent or acted on, and nobody has actually gone and looked. At 8 credits a claim, looking is cheaper than being wrong.
Autonomous agents
An agent drafting a post, a reply or a report has no way to tell its own confident sentences from its correct ones. Pull the factual assertions out of the draft, check each one, and refuse to ship on a contradicted verdict.
How: check_claim over MCP, one call per assertion, in the publish step.
strictness: "high"
Research pipelines
A synthesis step will happily produce a clean paragraph resting on one shaky source. Run the brief's load-bearing claims back through an independent checker and attach the evidence to the output.
How: POST /api/checks per claim, then store the evidence array beside the paragraph it supports.
strictness: "high"
Support and sales teams
“We ship to every EU country.” “That's included on the free plan.” A wrong answer in a support reply costs a refund and a review. Check the promise before it goes out.
How: recency_days on a short window, so an old but well-sourced page can't give you a confidently stale answer.
strictness: "normal"
Editors and analysts
You already know the claim is probably fine. What you want is the two sources that say so, in one call, without opening nine tabs — and a flag when the only source is the one making the claim.
How: Run it in the dashboard; the evidence stays in your history, free to re-read and cite.
strictness: "high"
Due diligence
Founder claims, market-size figures and “first to market” assertions are exactly the sort of thing that has been published about — just not always by anyone independent. The domains_cited count tells you whether it is corroborated or echoed.
How: Watch domains_cited: a supported verdict on one domain is a lead, not a finding.
strictness: "high"
Moderation and trust teams
Reported content arrives faster than a human can source it. A verdict with quoted evidence turns a reviewer's job from research into judgement — and an unverifiable verdict is a legitimate outcome, not a failure to answer.
How: Route by verdict: contradicted to action, mixed and unverifiable to a human.
strictness: "normal"
Fact Check reads what has been published. It cannot settle a matter of opinion, tell you what someone believes, predict what will happen, or verify something private that has never been written down anywhere. On those it will say unverifiable — and if it found nothing at all to weigh, it will refund you for the privilege of hearing so.