Lesson 2.1 · D2 Output Evaluation & Validation · 6 min
Evaluate output for accuracy and completeness
Check the output against the source: facts, figures, scope, qualifiers and coverage.
What the exam tests
Spotting outputs that read well but misstate or omit something material. This is the most heavily weighted domain.
Key ideas
- Compare with the source's structure
- Use the source's headings, tabs or section list as a checklist. If a report has 12 regions, the summary should account for 12.
- Watch scope and qualifiers
- “Carbon neutral at head office” is not “carbon neutral across all operations”. “After the first 12 months” is not “at any time”.
- Recompute numbers
- Re-do arithmetic and percentages. Check that totals reconcile with their parts and that percentage points aren't confused with percent change.
- Completeness depends on purpose
- A policy summary that lists benefits but not exclusions, or a judgment summary without the dissent your argument relies on, is incomplete for its reader.
- Check every input was used
- When several files or long inputs are involved, ask Claude to list what it covered and compare.
Worked example
Claude summarises a supplier contract.
Weaker
Read the summary; it sounds right, so send it.
Stronger
Check the summary against the contract's section list, confirm key clauses (termination, liability, renewal) are covered, and verify each date and amount.
Why: Fluent summaries can silently drop clauses or conditions that change their meaning.
Common traps
- Treating detail or confident tone as evidence of accuracy.
- Accepting “rounding” that changes a figure materially.
- Assuming Claude chose the “most important” parts when it simply missed some.
Remember
Accuracy is checked against the source, not against how the output sounds.