Executable
Can I get this ground for a filter or pour-over brewer?
ALS-COFFEE-1.0-GRIND-002
This question is asked as a test and produces a result for a real page.
Assertion
filter_grind_option option_available true
Applicability
- applies when
- the product is roasted coffee sold by mass and the seller offers any grind choice
- signal
- product_type or title indicates coffee
Accepted evidence
- product_options — a purchasable option value naming filter as a grind e.g. Filter
- variant_availability — the matching variant is listed and marked available
Explicitly insufficient evidence
What does not count, and why. Published because the omission is where a check quietly becomes a claim.
- "filter coffee" used as a category or serving style
In much of the world the phrase names a beverage style rather than a grind, so its presence in prose asserts nothing about what is selectable. - "suitable for all brew methods" or "one grind, every method"
The published grind bands for immersion and espresso do not overlap, so a single grind cannot suit every method; this is the most confidently wrong claim in the class and a naive check accepts it because it is maximally inclusive. - a brewing-guides navigation block listing pour-over, drip and AeroPress
Site navigation and topic lists are chrome rather than an assertion about this item, and the engine deliberately excludes raw page text from evidence for exactly this reason. - "medium grind" offered as equivalent to filter
Coarseness words are seller-relative and two published scales disagree about where medium sits, so the word does not resolve to the filter case.
Conflict rules
- When the page names pour-over in prose but offers only whole bean — then this entry fails; a recommendation is not a purchasable option precedence: product_options > product_description
- When both Filter and Espresso options exist — then both entries pass independently; they describe different offers on the same product
What a pass licenses
A pass establishes: That an option value naming filter is purchasable on this product at the time of the test.
A pass does NOT establish: That a particular particle size is delivered, that it suits the buyer's brewer, or that the option means a grind rather than a pack or a category.
Discrimination
Measured fail rate: 92.9% (n=99 products asked)
Predicted before this standard had ever run: 60-85% — the real rate is higher, so the entry discriminates less than predicted.
Filter is named less consistently than espresso and competes with pour-over, drip and V60 as option wording, so the fixed string will miss stores that offer the same thing under a different name. The high band reflects vocabulary fragmentation as much as seller behaviour, and that is a weakness of the assertion rather than a finding about merchants.
Known gaps
- no adversarial-corpus coverage exists for variant_option at all — false_pass
For a shopper
If you brew with a cone, a Chemex or a drip machine, this is the grind you need, and the words sellers use for it vary. Look for a selectable option rather than a sentence, and treat any claim that one grind suits every brewer as unreliable.
For a merchant
Name the filter or pour-over grind as a purchasable option value, and avoid offering a single grind described as suitable for all methods, which cannot be true across immersion and espresso.
Grounding
- Independent refuting pass, live Google autocomplete retrieval (suggestqueries.google.com) (internal_measurement)
that brewer-specific grind queries dominate the coffee-grind autocomplete set, including pour over, french press, moka pot, cold brew and percolator, which is direct current search-intent evidence rather than trade material - Specialty Coffee Association, coffee standards index (trade_body)
that no published trade standard defines retail grind designations, so a filter grind claim is checkable only as a stated designation and never as a measured particle size