Audit: QRS - Glutamate for Health & Longevity of the ER frontmatter

Audit conducted on 29/07/2026 02:01 using AI4L / Opus 4.8

Summary

Items	Count
Total	91
Passed	85
Failed	0
N/A	6
Pass Rate	100.00%

Total = Passed + Failed + N/A
Pass Rate = Passed / (Passed + Failed) × 100
N/A items are excluded from the pass rate calculation

1. General Rules

#	Description	Result	Comments
1.1	Every claim, magnitude, label, recommendation, and statement in the QRS is literally supported by content in the source ER.	🟢	Dose, method, timing, benefits, risks, markers, and cadence all trace to the ER.
1.2	Where the ER uses cautious phrasing (“not formally studied”, “None documented in human trials to date”, “theoretical concern”, “data are limited”), the QRS uses the same phrasing.	🟢	“Speculative” and “Theoretical excitotoxicity” preserve the ER’s cautious framing.
1.3	The QRS never strengthens an ER claim (e.g., “not formally studied” → “not required”) or softens one (e.g., “do not use during pregnancy” → “use with caution during pregnancy”).	🟢	No strengthening or softening detected.
1.4	The QRS does not relabel an ER fact under a different decision category. A “Benefit-Modifying Factor” from ER section is not surfaced as a “Caution”; a “Risk-Modifying Factor” is not surfaced as a “Side Effect”; etc.	🟢	Interactions, benefits, and risks are drawn from their matching ER sections.
1.5	PubMed IDs, study citations, expert names, clinical trial identifiers (NCT*), and brand names appear in the QRS only if they appear in the source ER for the same fact.	🟢	QRS carries no citations, NCT IDs, or brand names.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No new attributions introduced.

2. Focus, Tone & Audience

#	Description	Result	Comments
2.1	The QRS follows the tone of the ER, which is determined by the ER’s own language, phrasing, and framing.	🟢	Matches the ER’s measured, evidence-oriented tone.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	Monitoring targets are presented as information, not advice.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person address; protocol cells describe the method impersonally.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢
2.10	The target audience is health- and longevity-oriented adults who are risk-aware, proactive, and actively seeking to optimize health or apply the intervention under review.	🟢
2.11	The target audience is willing to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes as well as follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort.	🟢
2.12	The document is NOT written for the general population, who are unwilling to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes or follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort.	🟢
2.13	Framing, takeaways, and risk/benefit weighting throughout the document reflect this audience, including where an intervention’s signal for the average person differs from its signal for this audience.	🟢
2.14	The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging”. Proper names that contain “anti-aging” are quoted verbatim.	🟢	No “anti-aging” language present.
2.15	The document’s own voice uses formal clinical and scientific terminology, not colloquial or consumer-grade language. Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	Uses “sodium”, “blood pressure”, “MSG” consistent with the ER.

3. Template Integrity

#	Description	Result	Comments
3.1	The following labels and headings on the QRS are fixed and not modified (card/section headings, gate headings, tier labels, Monitoring column headers).	🟢	“Protocol”, “Time to effect”, “Benefits”, “Risk & Side Effects”, “Monitoring”, “Qualitative Assessment”, “Contraindications”, “Key Interactions”, and “Marker/Target/Why” all intact.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the QRS.	🟢	Full set of expected variable spans present.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢

4. Formatting

#	Description	Result	Comments
4.1	When the source ER section is empty, the QRS uses the ER’s own empty-state phrasing verbatim.	🟢	Absent tiers use display:none per 12.5/13.5; no fabricated empty-state text.
4.2	Where the ER presents a bulleted item as “Label: content”, the QRS uses the ER’s bold label verbatim as the cell or row label.	🟢
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji indicators in the rendered content.
4.5	The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. Any section that has more content in the ER than fits the per-section budget is condensed by the LLM, not extended onto a second page.	🟢	Content condensed to a single sheet.

5. Metadata

#	Description	Result	Comments
5.1	The metadata is placed inside a single HTML comment that is the first element after “<!doctype html>” and before any other comment, head, or body content.	🟢	Comment opens at line 2.
5.2	Inside that HTML comment the YAML block is delimited by a line “—” opening and a line “—” closing. Text before the opening “—” is permitted but is not parsed as YAML.	🟢	Delimiters at lines 3 and 13.
5.3	The metadata is not visible in any rendered view of the QRS and is not surfaced by any other element on the sheet.	🟢
5.4	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless required by YAML.	🟢	duration quoted (contains colon).
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	er_filename: glutamate_2026-0729-0003_Opus_ER.md
5.6	Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of QRS.md]”	🟢	qrs_prompt_version: 26.7.02
5.7	Creation date and time of the document is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]”	🟢	qrs_creation_date: 2026-0729-0153
5.8	The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]”	🟢	qrs_creator_ai_nickname: Opus
5.9	The nickname of the AI is just a single word model name without version, etc.	🟢
5.10	The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]”	🟢	qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 4.8
5.11	The full name of the AI consists of the nickname and the model version number and no additional qualifier.	🟢	“Opus 4.8”
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	qrs_filename: glutamate_2026-0729-0003_Opus_QRS.html
5.13	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless required by YAML.	🟢

#	Description	Result	Comments
6.1	[page_title] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter followed by “ - Quick Reference Sheet”. The [canonical_topic] is HTML-entity-encoded as needed.	🟢	“Glutamate for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed.	🟢	“Glutamate for Health & Longevity”
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	07/29/2026
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Opus 4.8
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢	Header carries only creation date and model.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER `Conclusion` section	🟢	Condenses the Conclusion’s practical framing.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	60 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	All statements trace to the Conclusion.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	“umami” is glossed as savory taste; no unexplained acronyms.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	ER states no absolute contraindication for the general population; section correctly empty.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	No stop items to format; vacuously satisfied.
8.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations/elaborations/rationale/attributions/citations; no content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash.	🟢	No stop items present.
8.5	Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item.	🟢	No stop items present.
8.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering), normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list.	N/A	The ER contraindication content uses no ranking notation.
8.7	If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty	🟢	Section left empty.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Covers brain-glutamate drugs, sodium restriction, MSG sensitivity, high-sodium/effervescent supplements, high-dose glutamine.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Five <li> items.
9.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations/elaborations/rationale/attributions/citations; no content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash.	🟢	All items concise; no trailing dashes.
9.5	Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — example drug lists, time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved.	🟢	“(memantine, ketamine)” and “(heart failure NYHA III–IV, advanced CKD stage 4+)” preserved.
9.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering), normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list.	N/A	The ER interaction content uses no ranking notation.
9.7	If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty	N/A	Caution items are present.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	Dose, salt substitution, and timing with meals.
10.3	If less than three distinct actionable implementation aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible.	N/A	Three actionable aspects are present.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER `Protocol` section.	🟢

11. Time to Effect

#	Description	Result	Comments
11.1	The three sets of [time] items cover the three most important time-to-effect aspects from the ER	🟢	Sodium benefit, flavor, salivation.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Sodium reduction (Medium) first, then salivation (Low).
11.3	If less than three distinct time-to-effect aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible.	N/A	Three time-to-effect aspects present.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢
11.5	If the ER does not provide any information on time to effect, the section is removed completely from the `Protocol Panel`	N/A	The ER provides time-to-effect information.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER `Expected Benefits` section	🟢
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢
12.3	Items are as concise as possible. No explanations/elaborations/effect sizes/qualifiers/attributions/citations/study details/mechanistic explanations.	🟢
12.4	Parenthetical content — effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢
12.5	If no items of a specific sub-section are present the respective is set to “display=none”.	🟢	benefits_high set to display:none (ER has no High-tier benefit).

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER `Potential Risks & Side Effects` section	🟢
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢
13.3	Items are as concise as possible. No explanations/elaborations/effect sizes/qualifiers/attributions/citations/study details/mechanistic explanations.	🟢
13.4	Parenthetical content — frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢
13.5	If no items of a specific sub-section are present the respective is set to “display=none”.	🟢	risks_high set to display:none (ER has no High-tier risk).

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	Blood pressure, 24-hour urinary sodium, fasting glucose, HbA1c, body weight/waist all present.
14.3	[monitoring_cadence] is populated with the monitoring cadence/frequency derived from the ER `Monitoring` section. It is not left with placeholder text or empty.	🟢	“Baseline, then recheck at 4–8 weeks, and every 6–12 months thereafter”

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All four qualitative markers of success from the ER are present.

Issues 29/07/2026 02:01

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.