{"uid":"cap_xtg5YDl1Rul9koJl-XBIv","slug":"second-opinion-panel-verdict-f811a937","name":"Second Opinion Panel Verdict","description":"Second Opinion panel: three independent skeptics attack the claim via different lenses (evidence, logic, currency). Majority verdict with per-seat breakdown.","url":"https://secondopinionx402.com/v1/verify/panel","method":"POST","headers":{},"bodySchema":{"type":"object","$schema":"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema","required":["input"],"properties":{"input":{"type":"object","required":["type","bodyType","body","method"],"properties":{"body":{"properties":{}},"type":{"type":"string","const":"http"},"method":{"enum":["POST"],"type":"string"},"bodyType":{"enum":["json","form-data","text"],"type":"string"}},"additionalProperties":false},"output":{"type":"object","required":["type"],"properties":{"type":{"type":"string"},"example":{"type":"object"}}}}},"responseSchema":null,"example":null,"exampleRequest":null,"tags":["x402"],"displayCostAmount":"0.75","displayCostAsset":"USDC","priceDynamic":false,"priceHint":null,"priceStatus":"priced","priceSource":"probe","requiresHandshake":false,"reviewCount":0,"rating":{"score":"0.00","successRate":"0.00","reviews":0,"stars":null,"state":"unrated"},"availabilityStatus":"unknown","priceObserved":null,"sessionDeposit":null,"pricing":{"kind":"static","summary":"$0.75/call","primary":{"kind":"static","protocol":"x402","network":"base","amountUsd":"0.75","per":"call","confidence":"exact"},"accepted":[{"kind":"static","protocol":"x402","network":"base","amountUsd":"0.75","per":"call","confidence":"exact"}]},"paymentMethods":[{"uid":"pm_2JyQsz4DB79KxjpWsAhrC","protocol":"x402","methodType":"crypto","chain":"base","mode":"charge","costAmount":"0.75","costPer":"request","priority":0,"asset":"0x833589fCD6eDb6E08f4c7C32D4f71b54bdA02913","unit":"request","depositMicros":null,"planRef":null}],"brandName":null,"brandSlug":null,"brandBaseUrl":null,"brandDocsUrl":null,"whatItDoes":"Runs a claim through three independent skeptic agents (evidence, logic, currency lenses) and returns a majority verdict with per-seat breakdown.","exampleAgentPrompt":"Run this claim through the full three-skeptic panel — evidence, logic, and currency — and give me the majority verdict with each seat's breakdown: 'mRNA vaccines alter human DNA permanently.'","exampleUseCases":[{"title":"Pre-publication research claim check","prompt":"Before I publish this article, run this claim through the three-skeptic panel and tell me how it holds up across evidence, logic, and recency: 'Intermittent fasting has been proven more effective than caloric restriction for long-term weight loss.'"},{"title":"Debate prep argument stress-test","prompt":"I'm preparing for a debate and I need you to attack this argument from all three angles — evidence, logic, and how current the supporting data is — and give me a majority verdict: 'Electric vehicles produce more lifetime carbon emissions than combustion engines.'"},{"title":"Viral misinformation triage","prompt":"This claim is going viral on social media — can you run it through the full panel of three independent skeptics and give me a verdict with each perspective's reasoning? The claim is: 'The Great Wall of China is visible from space with the naked eye.'"}],"resultDescription":"Returns a majority verdict (e.g. supported/refuted/uncertain) plus a per-seat breakdown from three independent skeptic agents, each attacking the claim through a distinct lens: (1) empirical evidence, (2) logical validity, and (3) currency/recency of supporting information.","failureModes":["Missing or empty claim body returns 400 bad request","Payment not settled via x402 protocol returns 402 Payment Required","Ambiguous or very short claims may produce low-confidence verdicts with no clear majority","Service timeout if claim requires extensive multi-agent processing","Malformed bodyType enum value returns 422 unprocessable entity"],"whenToPreferThis":"Choose this endpoint when you need a robust, multi-perspective verdict rather than a single-agent check — especially for high-stakes claims where a single reasoning path might miss flaws. It is superior to the quick or single-agent variants when thoroughness matters more than speed, and when you specifically want the evidence, logic, and currency dimensions evaluated independently and a majority vote to resolve disagreements.","instructions":null,"reviewSummary":null,"reviewSummaryHighlights":null,"reviewSummaryConcerns":null,"reviewSummaryGeneratedAt":null,"activationCount":0,"lastUsedAt":null,"lastSuccessfullyRanAt":null,"lastHealthCheckAt":"2026-09-13T18:39:03.291Z","isFirstParty":false}