Practical guide
A Useful AI Answer Can Say What It Does Not Know
Evaluate a guide's handling of missing offer details instead of rewarding confident wording.
Choose a question with a clear information need
Suppose you ask an AI catalog guide whether a spoken interview includes a separate written transcript. This is a specific product detail, not a question about whether transcripts are generally useful. Keep the request narrow so you can inspect the answer against the offer description. If the page does not mention a transcript, the guide's confidence should not become a substitute for that missing information. The first useful distinction is between an explained possibility and an established inclusion.
Look for a separation of evidence and inference
A careful answer could identify what the description states, explain what remains unclear, and suggest a focused question for the creator. You are evaluating whether the answer makes those distinctions, not assuming every guide will do so. In the interview example, a statement that the work contains spoken discussion does not establish the presence of a transcript. Ask the guide which part of the source supports its conclusion if that connection is missing from the reply.
Test whether a follow-up narrows the uncertainty
A useful follow-up asks for the exact source detail or for an explicit acknowledgment that the inclusion is not described. Repeating the original question more forcefully does not add evidence. In an authorized interaction, observe whether the follow-up produces a clearer distinction between known and unknown information. Report only that exchange rather than generalizing from it to every future answer. If you are merely proposing this check, label it as a proposed evaluation rather than a completed test.
Turn the unknown into an actionable question
The conversation can still be useful when it leaves the transcript question unresolved. It may help you identify the precise detail to ask about before evaluating the offer further. A clear next question would concern whether a separate written transcript is included for the named interview. The practical takeaway is to value an answer that maps the limits of available information. Confidence is not the goal; a better understanding of the product and the remaining uncertainty is.