diff --git a/.env-example b/.env-example
index 92d699e..dd9039c 100644
--- a/.env-example
+++ b/.env-example
@@ -5,7 +5,8 @@
 
 # ===== MODEL ACCESS AND SELECTION (OPENAI) =====
 
-OPENAI_API_KEY=your-openai-api-key-here           # For embeddings and optional model access 
+# OpenAI API Configuration
+OPENAI_API_KEY=your_openai_api_key_here
 
 # Default model for general processing and fallback
 DEFAULT_MODEL=gpt-4o
@@ -32,6 +33,9 @@ SERPER_API_KEY=your_serper_api_key_here           # Only needed if USE_SERPER=tr
 
 # ===== DATABASE CONFIGURATION =====
 
+# Database Configuration
+DATABASE_URL=postgresql://username:password@localhost:5432/verifact
+
 # Supabase Configuration
 SUPABASE_URL=https://your-project.supabase.co     # [REQUIRED] URL from Supabase dashboard
 SUPABASE_KEY=your-supabase-anon-key               # [REQUIRED] Public anon key
@@ -66,9 +70,23 @@ PORT=8000
 API_KEY_ENABLED=true                              # Enable API key authentication
 API_KEY_HEADER_NAME=X-API-Key                     # Header name for API keys
 DEFAULT_API_KEY=your-default-api-key              # Default API key
-RATE_LIMIT_ENABLED=true                           # Enable rate limiting
-RATE_LIMIT_REQUESTS=100                           # Number of requests per window
-RATE_LIMIT_WINDOW=3600                            # Rate limit window in seconds
+
+# Application Settings
+DEBUG=False
+ENVIRONMENT=development
+LOG_LEVEL=INFO
+
+# API Rate Limiting
+RATE_LIMIT_REQUESTS=100
+RATE_LIMIT_PERIOD=3600
+
+# Feature Flags
+ENABLE_CACHING=True
+ENABLE_ASYNC_PROCESSING=True
+
+# Security Settings
+SECRET_KEY=your_secret_key_here
+ALLOWED_HOSTS=localhost,127.0.0.1
 
 # ===== ADVANCED CONFIGURATION =====
 
@@ -78,7 +96,9 @@ ENABLE_MODEL_CACHING=true                         # Cache model responses
 MODEL_CACHE_SIZE=1000                             # Number of responses to cache
 
 # Logging Configuration
-ENVIRONMENT=development
-LOG_LEVEL=INFO                                    # DEBUG, INFO, WARNING, ERROR, CRITICAL
 LOG_FORMAT=plain
-# LOG_FILE=/path/to/log/file.log                  # Uncomment to enable file logging
\ No newline at end of file
+# LOG_FILE=/path/to/log/file.log                  # Uncomment to enable file logging
+
+# Optional: External Service Integration
+# ENABLE_SENTRY=False
+# SENTRY_DSN=your_sentry_dsn_here
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/pytest.ini b/pytest.ini
index 2b7c862..db4fbeb 100644
--- a/pytest.ini
+++ b/pytest.ini
@@ -5,4 +5,6 @@ python_classes = Test*
 python_functions = test_*
 
 # Display detailed test results
-addopts = --verbose 
\ No newline at end of file
+addopts = --verbose --tb=short
+filterwarnings =
+    ignore::PendingDeprecationWarning:starlette.formparsers 
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/src/tests/conftest.py b/src/tests/conftest.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e4c50b9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/tests/conftest.py
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+import pytest
+import warnings
+import sys
+from pathlib import Path
+from typing import Generator, Dict, Any
+
+# Add the project root directory to the Python path
+project_root = str(Path(__file__).parent.parent.parent)
+sys.path.insert(0, project_root)
+
+from src.verifact_agents.verdict_writer import VerdictWriter
+
+# Suppress the starlette multipart deprecation warning
+warnings.filterwarnings("ignore", category=PendingDeprecationWarning, module="starlette.formparsers")
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope="session")
+def test_evidence() -> Dict[str, Any]:
+    """Provide sample evidence for testing."""
+    return {
+        "content": "This is a sample evidence content for testing purposes.",
+        "source": "Test Source",
+        "relevance": 0.9,
+        "stance": "supporting"
+    }
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope="session")
+def test_claim() -> str:
+    """Provide a sample claim for testing."""
+    return "This is a test claim that needs verification."
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope="session")
+def verdict_writer() -> Generator[VerdictWriter, None, None]:
+    """Create a VerdictWriter instance for testing."""
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    yield writer
+
+@pytest.fixture(autouse=True)
+def setup_test_environment():
+    """Set up test environment variables."""
+    import os
+    os.environ["ENVIRONMENT"] = "test"
+    os.environ["LOG_LEVEL"] = "DEBUG"
+    yield
+    # Cleanup after tests if needed
diff --git a/src/tests/verifact_agents/test_verdict_writer.py b/src/tests/verifact_agents/test_verdict_writer.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..91afb98
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/tests/verifact_agents/test_verdict_writer.py
@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+import pytest
+from src.verifact_agents.verdict_writer import VerdictWriter, Verdict
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_verdict_writer_returns_valid_verdict():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Bananas are a good source of potassium."
+    evidence = [
+        {
+            "content": "Bananas contain around 422 mg of potassium per medium fruit, making them a good dietary source.",
+            "source": "Healthline",
+            "relevance": 0.9,
+            "stance": "supporting"
+        },
+        {
+            "content": "Potatoes and beans contain more potassium than bananas, but bananas are still a decent source.",
+            "source": "Harvard School of Public Health",
+            "relevance": 0.8,
+            "stance": "neutral"
+        }
+    ]
+
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="standard")
+
+    assert isinstance(verdict, Verdict)
+    assert verdict.claim == claim
+    assert verdict.verdict in ["true", "false", "partially true", "unverifiable"]
+    assert 0.0 <= verdict.confidence <= 1.0
+    assert isinstance(verdict.explanation, str) and len(verdict.explanation.strip()) > 0
+    assert isinstance(verdict.sources, list) and all(isinstance(s, str) for s in verdict.sources)
+    assert len(verdict.sources) > 0
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_verdict_writer_brief_detail():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Water freezes at 0 degrees Celsius."
+    evidence = [
+        {
+            "content": "Under standard atmospheric conditions, water freezes at 0°C.",
+            "source": "Britannica",
+            "relevance": 0.95,
+            "stance": "supporting"
+        }
+    ]
+
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="brief")
+
+    assert isinstance(verdict.explanation, str)
+    assert len(verdict.explanation.split()) <= 30  # brief explanation is usually short
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_verdict_writer_detailed_includes_sources():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "The Earth revolves around the Sun."
+    evidence = [
+        {
+            "content": "Astronomical evidence and observations confirm the heliocentric model.",
+            "source": "NASA",
+            "relevance": 0.99,
+            "stance": "supporting"
+        }
+    ]
+
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="detailed")
+
+    assert any(source.lower().startswith("http") == False for source in verdict.sources)
+    assert "nasa" in " ".join(verdict.sources).lower()
+    assert "sun" in verdict.explanation.lower() or "earth" in verdict.explanation.lower()
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_confidence_score_considers_evidence_relevance():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Cats are better pets than dogs."
+    evidence = [
+        {"content": "Cats require less maintenance.", "source": "PetGuide", "relevance": 0.9, "stance": "supporting"},
+        {"content": "Dogs are more loyal and emotionally supportive.", "source": "DogWorld", "relevance": 0.85, "stance": "contradicting"},
+    ]
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="standard")
+    assert 0.4 <= verdict.confidence <= 0.6  # Mixed evidence should yield moderate confidence
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_explanation_maintains_political_neutrality():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Voter ID laws reduce election fraud."
+    evidence = [
+        {"content": "Some studies suggest voter ID laws deter fraud.", "source": "Heritage Foundation", "relevance": 0.8, "stance": "supporting"},
+        {"content": "Other studies show minimal fraud cases regardless of ID laws.", "source": "Brennan Center", "relevance": 0.9, "stance": "contradicting"},
+    ]
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="detailed")
+    explanation = verdict.explanation.lower()
+    assert "republican" not in explanation
+    assert "democrat" not in explanation
+    assert "bias" not in explanation
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_alternative_perspectives_are_included():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Electric cars are better for the environment."
+    evidence = [
+        {"content": "EVs emit less CO2 over their lifetime.", "source": "EPA", "relevance": 0.9, "stance": "supporting"},
+        {"content": "Battery production has environmental impacts.", "source": "Nature", "relevance": 0.8, "stance": "contradicting"},
+    ]
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="detailed")
+    explanation = verdict.explanation.lower()
+    assert "battery" in explanation or "production" in explanation
+    assert any(term in explanation for term in ["emissions", "co2", "co₂", "co 2"])
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_explanation_detail_levels_vary():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Electric cars are better for the environment than gas cars."
+    evidence = [
+        {
+            "content": "Electric vehicles produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions over their lifetime.",
+            "source": "EPA",
+            "relevance": 0.95,
+            "stance": "supporting"
+        },
+        {
+            "content": "Battery production for electric vehicles involves mining and emissions.",
+            "source": "Nature",
+            "relevance": 0.8,
+            "stance": "contradicting"
+        }
+    ]
+
+    brief = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="brief")
+    standard = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="standard")
+    detailed = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="detailed")
+
+    # Ensure increasing richness in explanation
+    assert len(brief.explanation.split()) < len(standard.explanation.split()) < len(detailed.explanation.split())
+
+    # Optional: Check sources and content presence in detailed output
+    assert len(detailed.sources) >= 2
+    explanation = detailed.explanation.lower()
+    assert "battery" in explanation
+    assert "emissions" in explanation or "co2" in explanation
diff --git a/src/verifact_agents/verdict_writer.py b/src/verifact_agents/verdict_writer.py
index 3ffd7f2..5fe98fd 100644
--- a/src/verifact_agents/verdict_writer.py
+++ b/src/verifact_agents/verdict_writer.py
@@ -1,73 +1,157 @@
 import os
-from typing import Literal
+from typing import Literal, Optional
 
 from pydantic import BaseModel, Field
-
-from agents import Agent
-
+from agents import Agent, Runner
 
 class Verdict(BaseModel):
-    """A verdict on a claim based on evidence."""
+    """A verdict on a claim based on evidence.
+    
+    Attributes:
+        claim: The original claim being fact-checked
+        verdict: The verdict on the claim (true, false, partially true, or unverifiable)
+        confidence: Confidence in the verdict (0-1)
+        explanation: Explanation of the verdict with reasoning and citations
+        sources: List of sources used to reach the verdict
+        alternative_perspectives: Optional list of alternative viewpoints when evidence is mixed
+    """
 
     claim: str
     verdict: Literal["true", "false", "partially true", "unverifiable"] = Field(
         description="The verdict on the claim: true, false, partially true, or unverifiable"
     )
-    confidence: float = Field(description="Confidence in the verdict (0-1)", ge=0.0, le=1.0)
-    explanation: str = Field(description="Detailed explanation of the verdict with reasoning")
-    sources: list[str] = Field(description="List of sources used to reach the verdict", min_items=1)
+    confidence: float = Field(
+        description="Confidence in the verdict (0-1)", ge=0.0, le=1.0
+    )
+    explanation: str = Field(
+        description="Explanation of the verdict with reasoning and citations"
+    )
+    sources: list[str] = Field(
+        description="List of sources used to reach the verdict", min_length=1
+    )
+    alternative_perspectives: Optional[list[str]] = Field(
+        description="Alternative perspectives or interpretations when evidence is mixed",
+        default_factory=list
+    )
 
 PROMPT = """
 You are a verdict writing agent. Your job is to analyze evidence and determine
-the accuracy of a claim, providing a detailed explanation and citing sources.
-
-Your verdict should:
-1. Classify the claim as true, false, partially true, or unverifiable
-2. Assign a confidence score (0-1)
-3. Provide a detailed explanation of your reasoning
-4. Cite all sources used
-5. Summarize key evidence
-
-Guidelines for evidence assessment:
-- Base your verdict solely on the provided evidence
-- Weigh contradicting evidence according to source credibility and relevance
-- Consider the relevance score (0-1) as an indicator of how directly the evidence addresses the claim
-- Treat higher relevance and credibility sources as more authoritative
-- Evaluate stance ("supporting", "contradicting", "neutral") for each piece of evidence
-- When sources conflict, prefer more credible, more recent, and more directly relevant sources
-- Identify consensus among multiple independent sources as especially strong evidence
-
-Guidelines for confidence scoring:
-- Assign high confidence (0.8-1.0) only when evidence is consistent, highly credible, and comprehensive
-- Use medium confidence (0.5-0.79) when evidence is mixed or from fewer sources
-- Use low confidence (0-0.49) when evidence is minimal, outdated, or from less credible sources
-- When evidence is insufficient, label as "unverifiable" with appropriate confidence based on limitations
-- For partially true claims, explain precisely which parts are true and which are false
-
-Guidelines for explanations: Provide a 1-2 sentence summary focusing on core evidence only
-
-Your explanation must be:
-- Clear and accessible to non-experts
-- Factual rather than judgmental
-- Politically neutral and unbiased
-- Properly cited with all sources attributed
-- Transparent about limitations and uncertainty
-
-When evidence is mixed or contradictory, clearly present the different perspectives
-and explain how you reached your conclusion based on the balance of evidence.
-
-For your output, provide:
-- claim: The claim you are fact-checking
-- verdict: The verdict on the claim: true, false, partially true, or unverifiable
-- confidence: A score from 0.0 to 1.0 indicating your confidence in the verdict
-- explanation: A 1-2 sentence summary focusing on core evidence only
-- sources: A list of sources used to reach the verdict
+the accuracy of a claim, providing a clear explanation and citing sources.
+
+---
+
+Claim: {claim}
+
+Evidence provided:
+{evidence}
+
+Explanation detail level: {detail_level}
+
+---
+
+You must output:
+- claim: The original claim being fact-checked
+- verdict: true, false, partially true, or unverifiable
+- confidence: from 0.0 to 1.0
+- explanation: A clear explanation tailored to the detail level
+- sources: List of sources cited in the explanation
+- alternative_perspectives: List of alternative viewpoints when evidence is mixed
+
+---
+
+Instructions:
+
+1. Assess the credibility and relevance of each evidence entry.
+2. Classify evidence by stance: supporting, contradicting, neutral.
+3. Weigh supporting vs. contradicting evidence and determine consensus.
+4. Use source credibility (e.g., peer-reviewed > blog) and relevance score.
+5. Cite sources in explanation as [n] and include the list of sources.
+6. Adjust the explanation based on detail level:
+   - brief: One sentence summary with 1–2 sources (max 30 words)
+   - standard: 2–3 sentences with key evidence
+   - detailed: Comprehensive analysis with all evidence and perspectives
+7. For confidence scoring:
+   - 0.9-1.0: Overwhelming evidence from multiple high-credibility sources, all supporting
+   - 0.7-0.89: Strong evidence from reliable sources, mostly supporting
+   - 0.4-0.69: Mixed evidence or limited sources
+   - 0.1-0.39: Weak or contradictory evidence
+   - 0.0-0.09: Insufficient evidence
+   IMPORTANT: When evidence is mixed (both supporting and contradicting), confidence MUST be between 0.4 and 0.6
+
+Guidelines:
+- Maintain political neutrality
+- Write for a non-expert audience
+- Be transparent about uncertainty or lack of evidence
+- If evidence is mixed, include alternative perspectives
+- Consider evidence relevance when assigning confidence scores
+- For mixed evidence, confidence MUST be between 0.4 and 0.6
 """
 
-verdict_writer_agent = Agent(
-    name="VerdictWriter",
-    instructions=PROMPT,
-    output_type=Verdict,
-    tools=[],
-    model=os.getenv("VERDICT_WRITER_MODEL"),
-)
\ No newline at end of file
+def format_evidence_block(evidence: list[dict]) -> str:
+    """Converts a list of evidence dicts to a readable block for the LLM.
+    
+    Args:
+        evidence: List of evidence dictionaries containing content, source, relevance, and stance
+        
+    Returns:
+        Formatted string with numbered evidence entries
+    """
+    formatted = []
+    for i, e in enumerate(evidence, 1):
+        formatted.append(
+            f"{i}. [{e.get('stance')}] \"{e.get('content')}\" — {e.get('source')} (relevance: {e.get('relevance', 1.0)})"
+        )
+    return "\n".join(formatted)
+
+class VerdictWriter:
+    """Agent responsible for generating verdicts based on evidence.
+    
+    The VerdictWriter analyzes evidence and produces well-reasoned verdicts with
+    proper citations and explanations. It supports multiple detail levels and
+    includes alternative perspectives when evidence is mixed.
+    
+    Attributes:
+        agent: The underlying Agent instance
+    """
+
+    def __init__(self, model: Optional[str] = None):
+        """Initialize the VerdictWriter agent.
+        
+        Args:
+            model: Optional model name to override the default
+        """
+        self.agent = Agent(
+            name="VerdictWriter",
+            instructions=PROMPT,
+            output_type=Verdict,
+            tools=[],
+            model=model or os.getenv("VERDICT_WRITER_MODEL"),
+        )
+
+    async def run(
+        self,
+        claim: str,
+        evidence: list[dict],
+        detail_level: Literal["brief", "standard", "detailed"] = "standard",
+    ) -> Verdict:
+        """Generate a verdict for a claim based on evidence.
+        
+        Args:
+            claim: The claim to fact-check
+            evidence: List of evidence dictionaries with content, source, relevance, and stance
+            detail_level: Level of detail for the explanation (brief, standard, or detailed)
+            
+        Returns:
+            Verdict object containing the verdict, confidence, explanation, and sources
+        """
+        prompt_input = PROMPT.format(
+            claim=claim,
+            evidence=format_evidence_block(evidence),
+            detail_level=detail_level,
+        )
+
+        result = await Runner.run(self.agent, prompt_input)
+        verdict = result.final_output_as(Verdict)
+        verdict.claim = claim  # Ensure claim is set correctly
+        verdict.sources = list(set(filter(None, verdict.sources)))  # Deduplicate and remove empty
+        return verdict
diff --git a/test_agents.py b/test_agents.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1006278
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test_agents.py
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+from agents import Agent as OpenAIAgent
+from src.verifact_agents import ClaimDetector
+
+def test_imports():
+    print("Successfully imported OpenAI Agent")
+    print("Successfully imported VeriFact ClaimDetector")
+
+def test_agent_imports():
+    """Test that agent classes can be imported successfully."""
+    assert OpenAIAgent is not None
+    assert ClaimDetector is not None
+
+if __name__ == "__main__":
+    test_imports() 
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/tests/conftest.py b/tests/conftest.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..104e17f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/conftest.py
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+import pytest
+import os
+import warnings
+from typing import Generator, Dict, Any
+from src.verifact_agents.verdict_writer import VerdictWriter
+
+# Suppress the starlette multipart deprecation warning
+warnings.filterwarnings("ignore", category=PendingDeprecationWarning, module="starlette.formparsers")
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope="session")
+def test_evidence() -> Dict[str, Any]:
+    """Provide sample evidence for testing."""
+    return {
+        "content": "This is a sample evidence content for testing purposes.",
+        "source": "Test Source",
+        "relevance": 0.9,
+        "stance": "supporting"
+    }
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope="session")
+def test_claim() -> str:
+    """Provide a sample claim for testing."""
+    return "This is a test claim that needs verification."
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope="session")
+def verdict_writer() -> Generator[VerdictWriter, None, None]:
+    """Create a VerdictWriter instance for testing."""
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    yield writer
+
+@pytest.fixture(autouse=True)
+def setup_test_environment():
+    """Set up test environment variables."""
+    os.environ["ENVIRONMENT"] = "test"
+    os.environ["LOG_LEVEL"] = "DEBUG"
+    yield
+    # Cleanup after tests if needed 
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/tests/verifact_agents/test_verdict_writer.py b/tests/verifact_agents/test_verdict_writer.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..40af4ae
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/verifact_agents/test_verdict_writer.py
@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+import pytest
+from src.verifact_agents.verdict_writer import VerdictWriter, Verdict
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_verdict_writer_returns_valid_verdict():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Bananas are a good source of potassium."
+    evidence = [
+        {
+            "content": "Bananas contain around 422 mg of potassium per medium fruit, making them a good dietary source.",
+            "source": "Healthline",
+            "relevance": 0.9,
+            "stance": "supporting"
+        },
+        {
+            "content": "Potatoes and beans contain more potassium than bananas, but bananas are still a decent source.",
+            "source": "Harvard School of Public Health",
+            "relevance": 0.8,
+            "stance": "neutral"
+        }
+    ]
+
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="standard")
+
+    assert isinstance(verdict, Verdict)
+    assert verdict.claim == claim
+    assert verdict.verdict in ["true", "false", "partially true", "unverifiable"]
+    assert 0.0 <= verdict.confidence <= 1.0
+    assert isinstance(verdict.explanation, str) and len(verdict.explanation.strip()) > 0
+    assert isinstance(verdict.sources, list) and all(isinstance(s, str) for s in verdict.sources)
+    assert len(verdict.sources) > 0
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_verdict_writer_brief_detail():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Water freezes at 0 degrees Celsius."
+    evidence = [
+        {
+            "content": "Under standard atmospheric conditions, water freezes at 0°C.",
+            "source": "Britannica",
+            "relevance": 0.95,
+            "stance": "supporting"
+        }
+    ]
+
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="brief")
+
+    assert isinstance(verdict.explanation, str)
+    assert len(verdict.explanation.split()) <= 30  # brief explanation is usually short
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_verdict_writer_detailed_includes_sources():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "The Earth revolves around the Sun."
+    evidence = [
+        {
+            "content": "Astronomical evidence and observations confirm the heliocentric model.",
+            "source": "NASA",
+            "relevance": 0.99,
+            "stance": "supporting"
+        }
+    ]
+
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="detailed")
+
+    assert any(source.lower().startswith("http") == False for source in verdict.sources)
+    assert "nasa" in " ".join(verdict.sources).lower()
+    assert "sun" in verdict.explanation.lower() or "earth" in verdict.explanation.lower()
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_confidence_score_considers_evidence_relevance():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Cats are better pets than dogs."
+    evidence = [
+        {"content": "Cats require less maintenance.", "source": "PetGuide", "relevance": 0.9, "stance": "supporting"},
+        {"content": "Dogs are more loyal and emotionally supportive.", "source": "DogWorld", "relevance": 0.85, "stance": "contradicting"},
+    ]
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="standard")
+    assert 0.4 <= verdict.confidence <= 0.6  # Mixed evidence should yield moderate confidence
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_explanation_maintains_political_neutrality():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Voter ID laws reduce election fraud."
+    evidence = [
+        {"content": "Some studies suggest voter ID laws deter fraud.", "source": "Heritage Foundation", "relevance": 0.8, "stance": "supporting"},
+        {"content": "Other studies show minimal fraud cases regardless of ID laws.", "source": "Brennan Center", "relevance": 0.9, "stance": "contradicting"},
+    ]
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="detailed")
+    explanation = verdict.explanation.lower()
+    assert "republican" not in explanation
+    assert "democrat" not in explanation
+    assert "bias" not in explanation
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_alternative_perspectives_are_included():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Electric cars are better for the environment."
+    evidence = [
+        {"content": "EVs emit less CO2 over their lifetime.", "source": "EPA", "relevance": 0.9, "stance": "supporting"},
+        {"content": "Battery production has environmental impacts.", "source": "Nature", "relevance": 0.8, "stance": "contradicting"},
+    ]
+    verdict = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="detailed")
+    explanation = verdict.explanation.lower()
+    assert "battery" in explanation or "production" in explanation
+    assert any(term in explanation for term in ["emissions", "co2", "co₂", "co 2"])
+
+@pytest.mark.asyncio
+async def test_explanation_detail_levels_vary():
+    writer = VerdictWriter()
+    claim = "Electric cars are better for the environment than gas cars."
+    evidence = [
+        {
+            "content": "Electric vehicles produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions over their lifetime.",
+            "source": "EPA",
+            "relevance": 0.95,
+            "stance": "supporting"
+        },
+        {
+            "content": "Battery production for electric vehicles involves mining and emissions.",
+            "source": "Nature",
+            "relevance": 0.8,
+            "stance": "contradicting"
+        }
+    ]
+
+    brief = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="brief")
+    standard = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="standard")
+    detailed = await writer.run(claim=claim, evidence=evidence, detail_level="detailed")
+
+    # Ensure increasing richness in explanation
+    assert len(brief.explanation.split()) < len(standard.explanation.split()) < len(detailed.explanation.split())
+
+    # Optional: Check sources and content presence in detailed output
+    assert len(detailed.sources) >= 2
+    explanation = detailed.explanation.lower()
+    assert "battery" in explanation
+    assert "emissions" in explanation or "co2" in explanation 
\ No newline at end of file