The Problem With Most RAG Tutorials Every RAG tutorial ends the same way. You send a question, the LLM returns an answer, and you ship it. What the tutorial doesn't show you: that answer might be confidently fabricated. The LLM might be citing a source it invented. There's no way to know. I spent three days debugging exactly this in a prototype. The system sounded authoritative. It was hallucinating chunk references that didn't exist in the retrieved context. The fix wasn't a better prompt. The fix was building actual enforcement into the pipeline — and then automating quality measurement so metric regressions literally cannot ship. This is a production-grade RAG system that answers questions from documents with verifiable citations, hybrid search, cross-encoder re-ranking, and CI/CD quality gates.…