Would your AI research assistant notice that a real paper was retracted?

You click a citation in an AI research brief. The paper exists, the title matches, and the journal is real. You could still be reading a result the publisher later withdrew. Crossref's own example makes this easy to check: the record for a 2012 wound-dressing study, DOI 10.1021/am300292v, includes a retraction dated July 26, 2019. I checked the production record; the original title and the retraction are both there. Finding the paper would pass a basic citation check. Treating it as current supporting evidence would not. Crossref provides Retraction Watch data through its public API and a dataset updated each working day. Its documentation says corrections and expressions of concern are less comprehensively covered than retractions, so an empty result is not a clean bill of health. This is existing research infrastructure, not a new AI feature or a finding that a particular assistant failed. Before relying on an assistant's research summary, I would give it a known retracted paper and ask it to check publication status. Does the warning reach the sentence that uses the study, or stay buried in the bibliography? If that sentence helped justify a recommendation, I want the recommendation reconsidered before anyone acts on it. What publication-status check would you expect before putting your name on an AI-assisted report?