Skip to content

Compare information with an official source

flight dispatcherspilotsoperations officersaviation students

Purpose

What this workflow does

Uses the model as a difference-finder: you supply both the claim and the authoritative text, and it identifies exactly where they diverge.

Timing

When it is useful

Whenever you are about to rely on a summary, a set of notes, a training slide or an AI answer, and the underlying source is available to check it against.

Method

Step by step

  1. 01Obtain the authoritative text yourself, from eCFR, the FAA handbook, the operations manual or the aircraft flight manual.
  2. 02Paste both the claim to be checked and the official text into the prompt.
  3. 03Ask specifically for differences, not for a general assessment. General assessments produce agreement.
  4. 04Read the official text yourself for anything the model flags, and for anything it does not.
  5. 05Correct the original material and note where it came from, so the same error does not return.

Copy and use

The prompt

I want to check a piece of information against an official source. Do not use your own knowledge to answer the underlying question.

CLAIM TO BE CHECKED:
"""
[PASTE THE STATEMENT, NOTE OR SUMMARY HERE]
"""

OFFICIAL SOURCE TEXT:
"""
[PASTE THE REGULATION, HANDBOOK EXTRACT OR MANUAL SECTION HERE]
"""

Do the following:
1. List every factual assertion in the claim as a separate line.
2. For each assertion, mark it SUPPORTED, CONTRADICTED, PARTIALLY SUPPORTED or NOT ADDRESSED by the official source text, and quote the exact words from the source that justify your mark.
3. For anything marked CONTRADICTED or PARTIALLY SUPPORTED, state precisely what the source says instead.
4. List anything in the official source that the claim omits and that changes its meaning.
5. Do not resolve anything using your own knowledge. If the source text does not address an assertion, mark it NOT ADDRESSED and say so plainly.
6. Note if the source text I supplied appears incomplete or cut off mid-provision.

Your input

What you must provide

  • The claim, note or summary you want checked.
  • The full official text covering that point, obtained by you.
  • Enough of the source that the provision is not cut off partway through.

Before you rely on it

Verification steps

  • Read the quoted source passages yourself. The quote is the evidence, not the verdict.
  • Confirm you are using the current version of the regulation or manual, and check the effective date.
  • Treat NOT ADDRESSED as unresolved. It means the source did not settle the point, not that the claim is fine.
  • Where the answer matters operationally, confirm with the accountable person in your organisation.

Boundaries

Aviation safety limitations

  • This workflow checks a claim against text you supply. It does not tell you whether that text is current.
  • The model can misread a provision, particularly around cross-references and exceptions.
  • It cannot access eCFR, NOTAMs, operations specifications or company manuals. Everything it sees, you pasted.
  • This never substitutes for the accountable source: the regulation, the approved manual, or the person with authority in your organisation.

Verify before use · AI-generated information must always be verified against current regulations, approved manuals, official weather products and company procedures.

Related lesson

Domestic fuel requirements under 14 CFR 121.639

The three-part fuel test for a domestic Part 121 dispatch, how the alternate leg enters the calculation, and why forecast wind is part of the regulation rather than an afterthought.

Read the lesson →
Browse the full prompt library