agentleFS
Sign inStart free
Tsurai7Tsurai7/agentic-playbook/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md

verification-before-completion

Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Require evidence before claiming work is complete, fixed, or tests pass. Use before commits, PRs, or any "done", "fixed", "works now", "should work", or "tests pass" statement.

189 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use chinese-code-review, chinese-commit-conventions 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.
  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-code-review

    中文代码审查规范——在保持专业严谨的同时，用符合国内团队文化的方式给出有效反馈

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-commit-conventions

    中文 Git 提交规范 — 适配国内团队的 commit message 规范和 changelog 自动化

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • obraSkill

    diagnosing-superpowers

    Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor results, a skill that didn't fire, "it took too long", "why is it so expensive", "what is it doing" — or wants to build a bug report for the superpowers maintainers, for the current session or a past one identified by id or path, on any harness.

    Also in 20 projects that use this

  • jh941213Skill

    docs-ci

    문서 CI(링크·OpenAPI lint·breaking 게이트·mermaid 검증)나 문서 드리프트 감지(docs.yaml 신선도 검사)를 설치하거나 돌릴 때 사용. 문서 내용 작성은 docs-architecture·docs-interfaces·docs-manuals.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • jh941213Skill

    docs-interfaces

    API·이벤트 인터페이스 문서(OpenAPI·swagger·AsyncAPI 명세, 엔드포인트 레퍼런스, API 구성도·시퀀스, API CHANGELOG)를 만들거나 코드와 맞출 때 사용. 시스템 구성도는 docs-architecture, API 설계 원칙은 api-design-principles.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +3 more from Leodorareluctant259
  • +4 more from jh941213

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 177 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Do not claim completion until you have run the relevant check and seen successful output in this session.

    line 15
  2. Distinctive:

    Run it (fix failures; do not lower the bar)

    line 30
  3. Distinctive:

    Read output — confirm success, not absence of errors

    line 31
  4. Distinctive:

    Only then state completion

    line 32
  5. Distinctive:

    Keep this gate for every "done" statement.

    line 50

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 177 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Verification before completion

No assertions without fresh verification evidence.

Gate

Do not claim completion until you have run the relevant check and seen successful output in this session.

Required evidence

ClaimMinimum evidence
Tests passTest command output showing pass
Build succeedsBuild command exit 0 + output
Bug fixedReproduction steps pass after fix
Lint cleanLinter output on changed files showing zero errors
Test guards behavior XThe test fails when X is broken (bug reintroduced or mutated), then passes

Process

  1. Identify the command that proves the claim
  2. Run it (fix failures; do not lower the bar)
  3. Read output — confirm success, not absence of errors
  4. Only then state completion

Red flags — stop and verify

  • Using "should", "probably", "seems to"
  • Reporting success before running the command
  • Trusting a prior run after code changed
  • "I'm confident" without command output

Short form

CLAIM: [what you want to assert]
EVIDENCE: [command just run]
OUTPUT: [relevant success lines]
VERDICT: [claim supported only if output matches]

Keep this gate for every "done" statement.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free