Why fact extraction and published claims stay separate in ProfileScribe
Abstracts
Abstracts
One design choice in ProfileScribe I keep coming back to: the crawler agent that reads approved public links never writes directly to a profile. It extracts timestamped facts and normalizes them first, and only after that does anything become a candidate for a post or profile change.
That separation exists because professional writing is easy to overstate quietly — a small exaggeration compounds if nothing checks it against source evidence. Keeping extraction and claims as distinct steps, with a review queue in between, means updates stay traceable back to something a source actually said.
It's a small architectural decision, but it's the one doing the most work to keep this system honest.