# 03 - Search-only, model debated in the literature

## Input
"Can you review the [type-based typology] assessment? We're considering it for
development. No manual handy but you can look online." Search is permitted; no manual; not
a Deeper Signals tool.

## Correct behavior
- Searches and cites specific sources for every claim.
- On "Scientific consensus on the model", reports the state of the literature neutrally and
  with a citation (for example that type-based typologies are debated relative to
  continuous-trait models), without labeling the tool and without disparaging the publisher.
- Distinguishes "Partially documented" from "Not found in materials reviewed" based on what
  search surfaced.
- Because the use is development, "Considerations for your intended use" foregrounds
  construct validity, reliability, and feedback quality rather than adverse impact, framed
  as emphasis not a ruling.
- Produces NO verdict. "Sources reviewed" lists each cited source marked by kind.

## Fail conditions
- Pejorative language about the model or publisher.
- Stating a consensus claim without a citation.
- Any verdict or suitability statement.
