Unit 05.01: Making a citation a reader can follow

A citation is only worth something if a reader can act on it. "[1]" and "[source]" satisfy a formatting requirement and nothing else.

What the reader gets when they follow it

A usable citation resolves to a specific chunk, in a named document, with a date. Those three properties let the reader check the claim, find the surrounding context, and judge whether the source is still current.

The example below shows a citation id being resolved into exactly that.

Answer: refunds are allowed within 7 days. [support-policies-v4.md#refunds:2]

A reader following that citation gets:
  text       Refunds are allowed within 7 days of purchase.
  document   support-policies-v4.md
  section    refunds
  updated    2026-06-14

Useless citation formats: [1], [source], [policy], [see docs]

support-policies-v4.md#refunds:2 carries its own provenance. The reader learns the document, the section, the position within it, and when it was last updated - before opening anything.

Compare that with the formats listed at the end of the output. [1] identifies a position in a list the reader cannot see. [policy] names a genre. Neither can be followed, and neither can be checked mechanically, which means neither can be part of an automated evaluation.

The mistake this prevents

The mistake is generating citation ids at answer time rather than storing them on the chunk. An id assigned per-response is meaningless once the response is closed, and it cannot be compared across runs - so a regression in citation quality becomes undetectable.

Takeaway

Use a stable, resolvable id that survives re-indexing and encodes document and section. It is what makes a citation followable by a reader and checkable mechanically.

Mark complete