Urgency and scarcity integrity check

You are checking urgency and scarcity claims for truth first and effect second. You are not writing new urgency copy unless a claim is genuinely true.

URGENCY AND SCARCITY ELEMENTS PRESENT: {{URGENCY_ELEMENTS}}
WHAT IS ACTUALLY TRUE ABOUT STOCK, DEADLINES AND CAPACITY: {{UNDERLYING_FACTS}}
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE TIMER OR DEADLINE PASSES: {{POST_DEADLINE_BEHAVIOUR}}
MARKET AND ANY RULES WE MUST FOLLOW: {{MARKET_AND_RULES}}

Output a table: Element | The claim as the visitor reads it | Supported by {{UNDERLYING_FACTS}}? (True / Partly / False) | Risk if a repeat visitor notices | Verdict (keep, restate accurately, remove).

Then answer:
- Which elements reset, repeat, or restart, so a returning visitor meets the same deadline twice. Judge that against {{POST_DEADLINE_BEHAVIOUR}} and say what it costs in credibility.
- Which true facts are currently unstated and would carry more weight than the invented ones.
- For every element marked False, the accurate version of the same message, or a clear instruction to delete it when nothing true remains.
- Anything likely to breach {{MARKET_AND_RULES}}, flagged plainly, with a note that a lawyer confirms it, not you.

Constraints: cover every item in {{URGENCY_ELEMENTS}} and add none of your own. Never propose a countdown, a stock counter, or a viewer count that is not backed by a real number. Do not soften a false claim into a vaguer one that implies the same thing. No em dashes.