Explain one AI change to three readers without changing the facts

A communication exercise for an AI product update: keep the facts fixed while changing the explanation for its audience. The following scenario is fictional.

Shared fact card: “A document assistant now displays the source passage beside its answer. This makes review easier to attempt; it does not guarantee that the answer is correct. Older documents may still be out of date.”

For a user: “You can open the passage used for an answer. Check that it supports the claim and applies to your situation.”

For a reviewer: “Compare the answer with the displayed passage. Record unsupported claims and outdated sources separately.”

For a teammate writing the release note: “Describe the new source display. Avoid calling it verified accuracy or implying that source visibility removes the need for review.”

Now ask each reader to explain the change back in their own words. Write down the wording that led to a different interpretation before revising it.

The aim is understandable meaning, not three increasingly persuasive sales pitches. A useful simplification should preserve the limitation that matters to the reader.

Which sentence would you shorten, and what caveat must survive the edit?