Audit: QRS - Green Coffee Extract for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 21/09/2026 02:07 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	93
Passed	83
Failed	0
N/A	10
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 protocol values, time-to-effect figures, benefit/risk tiers, contraindications, interactions, biomarker targets and qualitative markers trace to ER lines 301–331, 354–376, 409, 433–455 and 475–479.
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.	🟢	The ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” flags on the three Low-tier benefits are carried as “— all conflicted” (QRS line 547); “Speculative” tiers retained on both benefits and risks.
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”).	🟢	The ER’s absolute contraindication for adenosine/dipyridamole stress testing stays in the Contraindications gate (line 585), not the Key Interactions gate; all eight “should avoid” populations remain contraindications.
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.	🟢	No content from ER Benefit-Modifying Factors (lines 222–232) or Risk-Modifying Factors (lines 288–296) appears in any QRS gate or risk tier.
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.	🟢	The QRS contains no PMIDs, NCT IDs, author names, or brand names (Svetol, Naturex, Life Extension, CoffeeGenic all absent).
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attributions present; “the dose-finding trials” in time_1_sub is the ER’s own wording (ER line 409).

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.	🟢	Measured, sceptical register of the ER Conclusion is preserved in at_a_glance and in the risk tiers.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Targets and cadence are stated as actionable measurements rather than warnings.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Protocol and monitoring content is presented in impersonal, descriptive form throughout.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperative or prescriptive constructions in any authored span.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Passive/nominal constructions used (“Split dosing”, “repeated at 4 weeks”, “confined to before early afternoon”).
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns anywhere in the authored content.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Biomarker names are spelled out in full (“Alanine and aspartate aminotransferase”, “High-sensitivity C-reactive protein”, “Glycated hemoglobin”).
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Every gate, tier and table cell is a compressed phrase; no sentences carry rationale.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed — no direct address in any authored span.
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.	🟢	Functional (not conventional) biomarker ranges and a 10-marker panel assume a proactive, measuring reader.
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.	🟢	Pre-meal split dosing and a monthly waist/weight cadence assume effort tolerance.
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.	🟢	No simplification toward general-population framing; the full interaction and contraindication set is retained.
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.	🟢	at_a_glance makes explicit that the effects are “too small to notice without measurement” — the distinction that matters to a measuring 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.	🟢	The string “anti-aging” does not occur; the title uses “Health & Longevity”.
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)”; “oral” / “administered orally” not “taken by mouth” / “given by mouth”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). This holds on EVERY surface, including the QRS lede — the stricter plain-language bar (see 2.7) does not license lay phrasing for route of administration. Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	No colloquial route-of-administration or adverse-event phrasing; “blood sugar” in the lede is the ER Conclusion’s own term (ER line 475).

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, gate headings, tier labels and table column headers match the template byte-for-byte.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All 38 template variables present; the repeatable marker_#_* and qualitative_item_# patterns are instantiated as marker_1–marker_10 and qualitative_item_1–6.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	Structural diff against the template shows differences only inside data-qrs-var spans; <span website="evidence_review">, <span website="audit"> and <span website="full_review"> are untouched, as are all CSS and comment blocks.

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”	N/A	No source ER section that feeds the QRS is empty.
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.	🟢	“Standard dose”, “Best time of day”, “Single versus split dosing” match the ER Therapeutic Protocol bold labels verbatim (ER lines 354, 362, 366).
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Monitoring marker names and Key Interaction labels reproduce the ER labels verbatim.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji codepoints occur anywhere in the file; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” markers are rendered as plain text.
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.	🟢	Every section is condensed against its ER source rather than carried over in full; no section was extended beyond the template’s single-page layout.

---

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.	🟢	Lines 2–14, immediately after <!doctype html> on line 1.
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.	🟢	Opening --- on line 3, closing --- on line 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; no metadata value is repeated in the body.
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.	🟢	Only duration: "00:02" is quoted, and it contains a colon requiring it.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: green_coffee_extract_2026-0921-0001_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]”	🟢	Line 5: qrs_prompt_version: 26.9.11, matching the QRS.md version badge.
5.7	Creation date and time of the document is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]” (e.g., 2026-0501-1430)	🟢	Line 6: qrs_creation_date: 2026-0921-0159.
5.8	The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]”	🟢	Line 7: 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)	🟢	“Opus” is a single word with no version or qualifier.
5.10	The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]”	🟢	Line 8: qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 5.
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 5” — nickname plus version, no qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9 matches the file’s actual name on disk.
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.	🟢	Confirmed across all nine frontmatter keys.

6. Page Title & Header

#	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 &)	🟢	Line 22: “Green Coffee Extract 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 &)	🟢	Line 417: “Green Coffee Extract for Health & Longevity”, matching ER frontmatter line 8.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: “09/21/2026” from qrs_creation_date: 2026-0921-0159.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: “Opus 5”.
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢	The header block is identical to the template apart from the four variable spans; no alternate-names line despite the ER carrying one.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section	🟢	Compresses ER lines 475–479 into composition, effect size framing, time horizon and the product-quality caveat.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	56 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Each of the four clauses maps to ER lines 475 and 477–479.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	No acronyms; “blood sugar”, “waist size”, “product quality” are lay terms.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	Only the generic “Pooled human trials” appears.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numeric magnitudes, confidence intervals or effect sizes.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All nine items trace to ER lines 311 and 321–330.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	The eight “Populations who should avoid” bullets plus the adenosine/dipyridamole absolute contraindication (ER line 311) are all present.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Nine <li> elements inside the span (lines 565–585).
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.	🟢	Trailing rationales stripped (“where total caffeine intake above 200 mg daily is discouraged”, “in whom no trials have been conducted”); no dash-led clauses remain.
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 Class B or C)”, “(above 15 μmol/L)”, “below 110/70 mmHg”, “three times the upper reference limit”, “(caffeinated preparations)”, “(during testing)” all retained.
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.	🟢	The ER uses no ranking notation; all parentheticals are already plain comma-separated lists.
8.7	The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications section identifies no population, condition, or scenario for which the intervention should be avoided, deferred, or used only under specialist supervision.	N/A	The section is not left empty — the ER names nine such populations/scenarios.
8.8	If the section is left empty, an HTML comment inside the [stop_items] span records the ER basis for the absence, naming or quoting the ER text relied on. E.g.	N/A	The section is not left empty.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All nine items trace to ER lines 301–319.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Nine of the ER’s ten interaction bullets are carried; the adenosine/dipyridamole bullet is correctly excluded because it sits in the Contraindications gate.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Nine <li> elements inside the span (lines 593–613).
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.	🟢	Every ER “Caution. …effect… Mitigation: …” tail is stripped; only the labels and drug lists remain.
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).	🟢	All named example drug lists retained; only the ER’s explanatory gloss “an older antidepressant class:” is trimmed from the MAOI parenthesis.
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.	🟢	No ranking notation in the ER; all parentheticals are plain comma-separated drug lists.
9.7	The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications section identifies no interaction, additive effect, or exposure that changes how the intervention is used.	N/A	The section is not left empty — the ER names ten interactions.
9.8	If the section is left empty, an HTML comment inside the [caution_items] span records the ER basis for the absence, naming or quoting the ER text relied on. E.g.	N/A	The section is not left empty.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER Protocol section	🟢	All three cells derive from ER Therapeutic Protocol lines 354, 362 and 366.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Dose, timing relative to meals, and dosing frequency are the three executable levers; the remaining ER bullets are contextual or population-specific.
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	The ER Therapeutic Protocol names twelve bullets, well above three.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section.	🟢	All nine spans populated; no placeholder text remains.

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	🟢	Blood pressure, body size and fasting glucose are exactly the three aspects the ER’s Practical Considerations “Time to effect” bullet names (ER line 409).
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Order matches the ER Expected Benefits High-tier ordering: blood pressure, then body weight/waist, then fasting glucose.
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	The ER names exactly three time-to-effect aspects, so no set is unused.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All nine spans populated; sub-lines reproduce the ER’s own wording.
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 does provide time-to-effect information.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All ten ER benefit headings across four tiers are represented (ER lines 155–217).
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated (lines 535–555).
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.	🟢	Every ER Magnitude: line and mechanistic paragraph is dropped; only the benefit headings remain, plus the ER’s own “Conflicted” flag.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses occur in any benefits span.
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 benefit tiers carry items in the ER, so no span needed hiding.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢	All seven ER risk headings across four tiers are represented (ER lines 239–283).
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated (lines 625–642).
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.	🟢	Every ER Magnitude: line, case-series detail and confounding note is dropped; only the risk headings remain.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses occur in any risks span.
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 risk tiers carry items in the ER, so no span needed hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Derived from the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success biomarker table (ER lines 435–446).
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All ten ER table rows are present as marker_1 through marker_10, with names, targets and rationale reproduced verbatim.
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.	🟢	Lines 795–798 reproduce the ER’s cadence sentence (ER line 433) in full.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Derived from the ER’s “Qualitative markers worth tracking alongside the laboratory values” list (ER lines 448–455).
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All six ER qualitative markers are present as qualitative_item_1 through qualitative_item_6, verbatim.

Issues 21/09/2026 02:07

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.