TL;DR
- AI can be persuasively wrong: the facts may look fine, but the logic fails.
- Verify contradictions, causal claims, missing assumptions, and unsupported conclusions.
- Clarity flags reasoning gaps at the sentence/claim level.
AI Reasoning Checker (for AI-Assisted Drafts)
Not AI search monitoring. Not authorship detection. This page is about verifying reasoning inside a draft: whether conclusions follow from evidence and whether the argument is consistent end-to-end.
What reasoning errors look like
1) Unsupported causal claims
“X caused Y” without causal evidence.
2) Logical leaps
Premises don’t justify the conclusion (missing steps).
3) Contradictions
Different sections conflict on assumptions, numbers, timelines, or definitions.
4) Overgeneralization
“Always,” “proven,” “best” without scope, caveats, or proof.
5) Definition drift
Key terms subtly change meaning mid-document.
5-minute reasoning-check workflow
- Write the main conclusion in one sentence.
- List the premises supporting it.
- Ask: if the premises are true, does the conclusion still follow?
- Scan for contradictions across sections.
- Add missing caveats/boundaries.
Reasoning red flags
- Overconfident certainty words: obviously, clearly, proven, always.
- Causal verbs without evidence: drives, causes, leads to.
- Comparisons without baseline or timeframe.
- Scope creep (segment → entire market).
How Clarity helps
Clarity flags contradictions, logic gaps, causal overclaims, and missing caveats—then proposes surgical fixes that keep your intent while tightening reasoning.
Related: Framework · Claim verification · Citation verification · How Clarity works