Genesis
The claim, not the answer
Everything it produces is a draft claim wearing the tone of a fact. Trust is something you calibrate, not something you extend.
Everything the machine returns is a claim dressed as an answer. Often the claim is true; the trouble is that true and false arrive in identical packaging: same fluency, same confidence, same helpful formatting. A citation it read and a citation it invented look the same on your screen. You cannot tell from the outside, and it cannot tell you from the inside.
The remedy is calibration, not paranoia. For low stakes, accept and move on; a wrong restaurant tip costs a mediocre lunch. The moment a claim will touch money, a signature, your health, or another person's opinion of you, it graduates: ask what it's based on, make it check live, or route it to someone whose job is to know.
How to practice it
Sort by blast radius.
Before trusting an answer, ask what it costs if wrong. Cheap: accept. Expensive: verify. Irreversible: verify twice, then have a human confirm.
Ask what it's based on.
Asking what a claim is based on separates a quoted document from a pattern-matched guess. The answer to that question is the real answer.
Prefer the checkable.
Steer it toward claims that come with a source you can open: a live search, a document, a number with a trail.
Catch it once, remember forever.
Verify one confident citation early in any serious task. If it survives, proceed. If it doesn't, you now know what mode you're in.