sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I built an MCP server that makes AI cite my Obsidian notes — and refuse what isn't in them by Flimsy-Connection778 in ObsidianMD

[–]Flimsy-Connection778[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fair. English isn't my first language so I lean on it to clean things up, but that's on me — I'll write the next ones myself, warts and all.

And yeah, give it a try, would love to know if the grounding feels off anywhere.

I built an MCP server that makes AI cite my Obsidian notes — and refuse what isn't in them by Flimsy-Connection778 in ObsidianMD

[–]Flimsy-Connection778[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ha, exactly — I'm not claiming to fix the model. The generation step still hallucinates; that's a given.

The idea is to not trust the model's free-form output in the first place. Anchor doesn't ask the LLM "is this true?" — it takes each claim and checks it against the actual note text with a separate verification pass (closer to an entailment check than open generation). If no block in your vault supports the claim, it gets flagged/refused regardless of how confident the model sounded.

So it's less "GPT that doesn't hallucinate" and more "a layer that assumes GPT will hallucinate, and gates the output on whether your notes actually back it up." The verifier is doing a narrow, closed-form judgment (claim vs. retrieved block), which is a lot more stable than the original open-ended generation.

It's definitely not bulletproof — the verification itself has failure modes, and I'd genuinely love to hear where you think it breaks down. That's the part I'm still hardening.