exec-verification
Skill1 starsChanged 28 days agoMITView on GitHub
Execution skill loaded to explicitly verify if the task solved the original user intent.
In this repository29 other files it gives its agents.
- exec-accessibilitySkill
- exec-architectureSkill
- exec-code-reviewSkill
- exec-debuggingSkill
- exec-documentationSkill
- exec-performanceSkill
- exec-refactoringSkill
- exec-repo-patternsSkill
- exec-securitySkill
- exec-testingSkill
- exec-ui-uxSkill
- tech-dockerSkill
- tech-flutterSkill
- tech-goSkill
- tech-graphqlSkill
- tech-kotlinSkill
- tech-nextjsSkill
- tech-nodeSkill
- tech-postgresSkill
- tech-pythonSkill
- tech-reactSkill
- tech-rustSkill
- tech-swiftSkill
- tech-tailwindSkill
- tech-typescriptSkill
- tech-vueSkill
- linear-spanks-gitSkill
- linear-spanksSkill
- linear-workflowSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 7
Before finalizing your work, step back from the code and answer these verification questions:
- Distinctive: line 12
Required Checks: Run checks appropriate to the change and all checks required by the repository.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Verification Strategy
Before finalizing your work, step back from the code and answer these verification questions:
- Core Intent: Did I actually solve the user's primary goal, or did I get distracted by an implementation detail?
- Breakage: Did my changes inadvertently break an existing feature or assumption? (Check downstream consumers of any modified functions).
- Unverified Paths: What edge cases or code paths remain untested or unverified? Explicitly state these in your completion handoff.
- Required Checks: Run checks appropriate to the change and all checks required by the repository. A documentation or copy edit does not automatically require a full application build.
- Evidence: Provide concrete evidence of verification (e.g., "Tested locally by hitting the
/authendpoint with an expired token").
Verification is the completion phase of the current task, not a new planning or independent-review request. Reuse valid evidence and record which checks cover the actual candidate. Do not restart checks or planning for optional polish. Material defects and unmet acceptance criteria still block.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

