verify
Skill2 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing - before committing, creating PRs, or moving to next task. Requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims.
188 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Doist/todoist-aitheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- udecode/better-convextheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- pytorch/heliontheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- amir20/dozzletheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Doist/todoist-clitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- codewithmukesh/dotnet-claude-kittheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use instinct-export, instinct-import and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
TheKREATORSSkillinstinct-export
Export instincts from project/global scope to a file
Also in 3 projects that use this
TheKREATORSSkillinstinct-import
Import instincts from file or URL into project/global scope
Also in 3 projects that use this
AviadPSkillrisk-assess
Assess the risk and blast radius of a proposed code change before implementing it. Evaluates CI impact, framework-wide vs localized scope, rollback path, and identifies blindspots. Use when user says "what's the risk", "is this safe", "assess the impact", "risk assess", "blast radius", or before applying framework-wide or CI-affecting changes. Do NOT use for code quality review (use code-quality) or plan validation (use design-validator).
Also in 3 projects that use this
diego-tobalinaSkillbuild-fix
Fix build and compilation errors systematically. Run when build fails.
Also in 6 projects that use this
AaravChadhaSkillsecure
Security review with a confidence gate - a finding exists only with a concrete exploit scenario and a high/medium/low confidence rating; everything else goes to a worth-hardening list, never inflated. Sweeps five surfaces: auth gates, secrets hygiene, injection and unsafe sinks, unsafe deserialization/crypto/transport, and LLM tool-use trust boundaries. Reports only, never fixes. Use when the user asks for a security review or to check vulnerabilities, secrets, or auth.
Also in 3 projects that use this
ArvorCoSkillspecify
Create feature specification from natural language description. Use when starting a new feature or creating a spec. Triggers on: create spec, specify feature, new feature spec.
Also in 10 projects that use this
- +1 more from TheKREATORS
Other versions188 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- ariadoss/superskills★ 1219% same
Wrote their own version · 187
- react/react★ 252ksame name
- facebook/react★ 252ksame name
- garrytan/gstack★ 141ksame name
- oven-sh/bun★ 97ksame name
- anthropics/financial-services★ 41ksame name
- anthropics/financial-services-plugins★ 41ksame name
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claude-sisyphus★ 41ksame name
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode★ 41ksame name
- anthropics/claude-quickstarts★ 19ksame name
- NVIDIA-NeMo/Speech★ 19ksame name
177 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository22 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- auditSkill
- brainstormSkill
- checkpointSkill
- codereviewSkill
- commitSkill
- debugSkill
- estimateSkill
- finishSkill
- healthSkill
- learnSkill
- lintSkill
- migrate-architectureSkill
- migrate-frameworkSkill
- onboardSkill
- planSkill
- recallSkill
- rememberSkill
- tddSkill
- tutorialSkill
- worktreeSkill
- write-skillSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 167 edited versions we read keep these.
11
Distinctive
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 21
If you haven't run the verification command in THIS message, you cannot claim it passes.
- Distinctive: line 28
Before creating a pull request
- Distinctive: line 29
Before marking a task as complete
- Distinctive: line 30
Before moving to the next task in a plan
- Distinctive: line 31
After fixing a bug (prove it's actually fixed)
- Distinctive: line 32
NOT for: research or exploration tasks
- Distinctive: line 92
Run ALL of the above in sequence.
- Distinctive: line 125
If you catch yourself thinking:
- Distinctive: line 164
Fresh runs only: - Never cite previous runs
- Distinctive: line 165
Full output: - Don't truncate or summarize
- Distinctive: line 168
One claim per verification: - Don't bundle claims
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 167 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
/verify - Verification Before Completion
Evidence before claims. Always.
Target: $ARGUMENTS
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCEIf you haven't run the verification command in THIS message, you cannot claim it passes.
Violating the letter of this rule is violating the spirit of this rule.
When to Use
- Before committing code
- Before creating a pull request
- Before marking a task as complete
- Before moving to the next task in a plan
- After fixing a bug (prove it's actually fixed)
- NOT for: research or exploration tasks
The Gate Function
BEFORE claiming any status:
1. IDENTIFY - What command proves this claim?
2. RUN - Execute the FULL command (fresh, complete, not cached)
3. READ - Full output, check exit code, count failures
4. VERIFY - Does output ACTUALLY confirm the claim?
→ If NO: State actual status with evidence
→ If YES: State claim WITH the evidence
5. ONLY THEN - Make the claim
Skip any step = lying, not verifying.Verification Matrix
| Claim | Required Command | NOT Sufficient |
| "Tests pass" | npm test output: 0 failures | Previous run, "should pass" |
| "Lint clean" | npm run lint output: 0 errors | "I fixed the warning" |
| "Build succeeds" | npm run build exit code 0 | "Lint passed so build should too" |
| "Bug fixed" | Test that reproduces bug: PASS | "Code changed, should work" |
| "Types correct" | npx tsc --noEmit exit code 0 | "I added the types" |
| "No regressions" | Full test suite: 0 failures | "Only changed one file" |
| "Requirements met" | Line-by-line checklist verified | "Tests pass" |
Operations
/verify test
npm test 2>&1
# Read FULL output
# Count: X passed, Y failed, Z skipped
# Exit code: 0 or non-zero/verify build
npm run build 2>&1
# Check: exit code 0?
# Check: no error output?/verify lint
npm run lint 2>&1
# Count: 0 errors, 0 warnings/verify types
npx tsc --noEmit 2>&1
# Count: 0 errors/verify all
Run ALL of the above in sequence. Stop at first failure.
/verify (no args)
Auto-detect what to verify based on package.json scripts.
Output
──── /verify ────
Command: npm test
Exit code: 0
Result: 42/42 tests passed, 0 failed
VERIFIED ✓ - All tests pass (evidence above)Or:
──── /verify ────
Command: npm test
Exit code: 1
Result: 40/42 tests passed, 2 failed
FAILED ✗ - 2 tests failing:
- src/auth.test.ts: "should validate token" - Expected true, got false
- src/user.test.ts: "should create user" - Timeout after 5000ms
DO NOT claim completion. Fix failures first.Red Flags - STOP
If you catch yourself thinking:
- "Should work now"
- "I'm confident this is correct"
- "Just this once I can skip verification"
- "Lint passed, so build will too"
- "I only changed one line"
- "The agent said it succeeded"
- "I'll verify after committing"
- "It's obvious this works"
ALL of these mean: RUN THE COMMAND. READ THE OUTPUT.
Rationalization Prevention
| Excuse | Reality |
| "Should work now" | RUN the verification |
| "I'm confident" | Confidence is not evidence |
| "Just this once" | No exceptions, ever |
| "Lint passed" | Lint is not build is not test |
| "Agent said success" | Verify independently |
| "I only changed a comment" | Comments can break builds (JSX, directives) |
| "Previous run passed" | State changed since then. Run again. |
| "Partial check is enough" | Partial proves nothing |
| "Too slow to run full suite" | Slow verification beats fast regression |
Integration
This skill is a cross-cutting concern. It applies to:
- @builder - Before claiming module is complete
- @executor - Before marking task checkpoint
- @tdd - Before claiming GREEN phase
- @reviewer - Before giving verdict
- @debugger - Before claiming bug is fixed
- @migrator - Before claiming migration is complete
Rules
- Evidence before claims - Non-negotiable
- Fresh runs only - Never cite previous runs
- Full output - Don't truncate or summarize
- Exit codes matter - 0 = success, anything else = failure
- Read warnings - Warnings can indicate real problems
- One claim per verification - Don't bundle claims
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
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.

