Audit: QRS - Glutamine for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 18/07/2026 06:47 using AI4L / Opus 4.8

Summary

Items	Count
Total	91
Passed	84
Failed	0
N/A	7
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.	🟢	All content (protocol, benefits, risks, contraindications, interactions, monitoring, qualitative markers) traces 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.	🟢	Cautious framing preserved via tier placement (“Speculative”, “Low”) mirroring the ER.
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.	🟢	Contraindications, interactions, benefits, risks, and monitoring all map to 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.	🟢	No PMIDs, citations, expert names, NCT IDs, or brand names appear in the QRS.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No 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.	🟢	Tone matches the ER’s measured, evidence-graded framing.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Meets the tone requirement.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Presents distilled evidence, not prescription.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	Content is presented as factual distillation of the ER.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Information is presented, not advised.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person address.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Plain language used; at-a-glance uses lay terms.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Compact throughout.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	No direct address.
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.	🟢	Framing targets this audience.
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.	🟢	Consistent with the audience.
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.	🟢	Not written for the general population.
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.	🟢	Weighting reflects the audience.
2.14	The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging” (e.g., “anti-aging clinics”, “anti-aging community”, “anti-aging medicine”). Proper names that contain “anti-aging” (e.g., “American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine”) 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 (e.g., “oral medication” not “pill(s)”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	Formal terminology used in the body; plain language limited to the At-A-Glance per section 7.

3. Template Integrity

#	Description	Result	Comments
3.1	The following labels and headings on the QRS are fixed and not modified: Card and section headings: “Protocol”, “Time to effect”, “Benefits”, “Risk & Side Effects”, “Monitoring”, “Qualitative Assessment”; Gate headings: “Contraindications”, “Key Interactions”; Tier labels: “High”, “Medium”, “Low”, “Speculative”; Table column headers in Monitoring: “Marker”, “Target”, “Why”	🟢	All fixed headings and labels match the template.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All expected variable spans are present.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	No stray span modifications detected.

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. Typical phrasings are “None documented in human trials to date” and “Not formally studied”	🟢	No source ER section is empty; every mapped section has content.
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.	🟢	Tier labels and monitoring marker names carry the ER’s labels; interaction items retain ER example lists.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Labels derive from ER content.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji indicators; the ER’s 🟩/🟥/🟨 markers are stripped.
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 is condensed to fit one page.

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.	🟢	Metadata comment spans lines 2–14, immediately after the doctype.
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.	🟢	YAML delimited by — on 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.	🟢	Enclosed in an HTML comment; not rendered.
5.4	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting.	🟢	Values trimmed; only “00:03” is quoted (contains a colon).
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	er_filename: glutamine_2026-0718-0447_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]” (e.g., 2026-0501-1430)	🟢	qrs_creation_date: 2026-0718-0639
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. (e.g., Opus, Sonnet, Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT)	🟢	Single word: Opus.
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 [qrs_creator_ai_nickname] and the model version number and no additional qualifier (e.g., Opus 4.6, Sonnet 3.2, Grok 4.5, Gemini 3.1, ChatGPT 5.4)	🟢	Opus 4.8 — nickname plus version, no qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	qrs_filename: glutamine_2026-0718-0447_Opus_QRS.html
5.13	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting.	🟢	Values are clean and consistently quoted only where required.

#	Description	Result	Comments
6.1	[page_title] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER `frontmatter` followed by “ - Quick Reference Sheet” (e.g., “Intervention - Quick Reference Sheet”). The [canonical_topic] is HTML-entity-encoded as needed (e.g., `&` for `&`)	🟢	“Glutamine 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 (e.g., `&` for `&`)	🟢	“Glutamine for Health & Longevity”.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	07/18/2026 from 2026-0718.
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 date, source line, and model; no extra content.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER `Conclusion` section	🟢	Distills the Conclusion (medical strength, gut-lining support, weaker signals, tolerability, high-dose harm).
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	54 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Each clause maps to a Conclusion passage.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Uses “gut and mouth damage”, “gut lining”; no acronyms.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial citations.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No effect sizes or statistics.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	Items derive from the “Populations who should avoid” bullet.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	Six contraindications match the ER.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Each item is a separate <li>.
8.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	No trailing explanatory clauses; the only dash is within a severity parenthetical.
8.5	Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item, kept as concise as possible (shortened or trimmed where needed to fit the one-page budget, but never dropped entirely).	🟢	Child-Pugh B–C, eGFR <30 qualifiers preserved.
8.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol.	🟢	ER uses no ranking notation in the contraindication bullet; nothing to normalize.
8.7	If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty	N/A	Contraindications are present.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	Items derive from the interaction bullets.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Six interactions selected; no overlap with contraindications.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Each item is a separate <li>.
9.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	No trailing clauses; concise.
9.5	Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — example drug lists, time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item, kept as concise as possible (shortened or trimmed where needed to fit the one-page budget, but never dropped entirely).	🟢	Example drug lists (anti-seizure, chemotherapy, BCAAs) preserved.
9.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol.	🟢	ER uses no ranking notation; example lists are plain comma-separated.
9.7	If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty	N/A	Key Interactions are present.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	Dose, timing, and split-dosing derive from the Therapeutic Protocol.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	Standard dose, timing, and dosing pattern are the three key actions.
10.3	If less that three distinct actionable implementation aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing.	N/A	Three actionable aspects are present and used.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER `Protocol` section.	🟢	All three action cells carry meaningful ER-derived content.

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	🟢	Gut barrier, exercise recovery, and performance/body-comp.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Ordered gut barrier (medium) → recovery (low) → performance (none).
11.3	If less that three distinct time-to-effect aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing.	N/A	Three time-to-effect aspects are present and used.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All three time cells carry ER-derived content.
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	🟢	Tiered items map to the ER’s High/Medium/Low/Speculative benefits.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four variables populated.
12.3	Items are as concise as possible. No explanations, no elaborations, no effect sizes, no qualifiers, no attributions, no citations, no study details, no mechanistic explanations, etc. Just the key fact.	🟢	Concise; effect sizes and the “⚠️ Conflicted” marker stripped.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parenthetical content carried through.
12.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	N/A	All four sub-sections have items.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER `Potential Risks & Side Effects` section	🟢	Tiered items map to the ER’s High/Medium/Low/Speculative risks.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four variables populated.
13.3	Items are as concise as possible. No explanations, no elaborations, no effect sizes, no qualifiers, no attributions, no citations, no study details, no mechanistic explanations, etc. Just the key fact.	🟢	Concise key facts only.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parenthetical content carried through.
13.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	N/A	All four sub-sections have items.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	Markers and cadence derive from the Monitoring Protocol.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All six biomarkers (blood ammonia, ALT/AST, BUN, eGFR, hs-CRP, fasting glucose) with targets and rationale.
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.	🟢	Cadence populated (baseline, 8–12 weeks, 6–12 months, 4 weeks for borderline values).

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	The four qualitative markers derive from the Monitoring section.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All four qualitative markers (digestion, infections, recovery/soreness, energy/cravings) listed.

Issues 18/07/2026 06:47

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.