Lesson Content

Three distinct types of quality failure.

Documents and plans fail quality checks for three distinct reasons:

1. Logic failures: Claims are not supported, evidence does not actually support the conclusion, or the reasoning contains gaps or circular logic.

1. Consistency failures: The document says two different things in different sections (or the numbers do not add up, or the timeline in the appendix contradicts the timeline in the body).

1. Completeness failures: The document does not include something a knowledgeable reader would expect to find – not because the author disagrees with including it, but because they did not think of it.

Each type requires a different check. Applying all three is the most thorough quality review.

The logic audit.

"Conduct a logic audit of this document. For each major claim or recommendation: (1) is there explicit supporting evidence or reasoning? (2) does the evidence actually support the claim, or is the connection assumed? (3) are there any statements that contradict each other or undermine the document's argument? Identify and quote the specific text for any logic issues."

The instruction to "quote the specific text" is important – it forces Gemini to cite the actual sentence rather than offering a vague general observation, and allows you to locate and address the specific issue.

The consistency check.

"Conduct a consistency check of this document. Look for: (1) numerical inconsistencies – does the same number appear differently in different places? (2) factual contradictions – does the document make claims in one section that contradict claims elsewhere? (3) timeline contradictions – are dates, sequences, and timelines consistent throughout? (4) reference inconsistencies – does the document refer to figures, tables, or sections that do not exist, or refer to them incorrectly? Quote the specific inconsistencies you find."

Consistency checks are where Gemini's ability to hold a long document in context simultaneously is most valuable – humans typically cannot compare page 3 against page 14 without deliberately re-reading.

The completeness check.

"Read this document as a knowledgeable reader in [field/domain]. What would you expect to find in a document of this type that is not included? Identify specifically: (1) standard sections missing, (2) obvious questions the document raises but does not answer, (3) stakeholder concerns the document should address but ignores, and (4) evidence or data you would expect to support the recommendations that is absent."

The completeness check is particularly valuable for documents written by domain experts who forgot what non-experts need explained, and for documents that were written to a deadline where certain sections were inadvertently skipped.

Stacking checks for high-stakes documents.

For high-stakes documents – board presentations, regulatory submissions, major proposals – stack all three checks:

1. Logic audit
2. Consistency check
3. Completeness check
4. Final question: "Given the three checks above, what are the three most important issues to address before this document is submitted?"

The synthesizing final question produces an actionable priority list from potentially extensive check results.