agentleFS
Sign inStart free
ahmedbenawahmedbenaw/pstack/skills/maintain-verification-skill/SKILL.md

maintain-verification-skill

Skill0 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub

Periodic pass that keeps a project's verification skill and feature map honest: parallel source readers per feature, one live session driving every feature, at most one PR of proven corrections. Use for /maintain-verification-skill or \"audit the verify skill\".

68 other projects use a version of this, 58 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use ketchup-video, poteto-help and 8 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.
  • tristanphvnSkill

    ketchup-video

    Catch the user up like /keel:ketchup, with a short silent video of slides for what happened and the waiting calls as text under it. Use for /keel:ketchup-video.

    Also in 13 projects that use this

  • ianclearySkill

    poteto-help

    Guides users through pstack setup, /poteto-mode, and picking the skill, playbook, or principle for a task. Type /poteto-help with a question.

    Also in 14 projects that use this

  • ianclearySkill

    principle-explain-the-number

    Apply before you trust, report, or act on a number you measured: a speedup, a regression, a throughput, a latency, or an eval result. Find what limits it, and rule out that it measured something other than the work you think.

    Also in 27 projects that use this

  • drafaelSkill

    in-your-own-words

    Restate the user's goals and the problem they are trying to solve to check understanding. Manual invocation only; use when the user explicitly invokes in-your-own-words or requests this understanding check. Do not solve the task or rewrite the assistant's last answer.

    Also in 26 projects that use this

  • TheOnlyFusionCubeSkill

    maintain-formal-verification-skill

    Bring a project's formal verification back in line with the code after the code changes: find the commits that touched verified code, update the model, harness, or properties to describe the code as it is now, rerun, and say whether each failure is drift in the verification or a bug in the code. Use for /maintain-formal-verification-skill, \"is the model still true to the code\", or after merges and refactors that touched verified code without rechecking it.

    Also in 19 projects that use this

  • Xia-AtaraxiaSkill

    benchmark-checklist

    Vets performance measurements for the limiter, tuning, physical limits, errors, repeatability, relevance, and proof that timed work happened. It applies to 'check this benchmark', 'report this speedup', measured regressions, and choosing a library or configuration from numbers. It reports spread and gaps before drawing a conclusion. Not for general testing policy or choosing test oracles - use principle-testing.

    Also in 33 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 3 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 3

    Common

    Most of the 68 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    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. Common:

    Index hygiene: Read the feature map README and glob its sibling files.

    line 26
  2. Common:

    Reconcile: Every feature file has a returned summary.

    line 30
  3. Common:

    Keep concise run notes (features covered, unreachable prerequisites, confirmed drift, outcome) in a scratch location.

    line 38

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 68 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

Maintain a verification skill

A feature map rots the moment the app changes. This skill is the upkeep loop for a skill generated by /create-verification-skill (or any project-local verification skill with a feature map). The unit of rigor is the feature, not every sentence: cover every feature file from source and exercise every feature live, without terminalising every bullet.

Outcomes

Pick one, and say which:

  • clean — every feature got source and live coverage; nothing worth shipping. No branch, no PR.
  • changed — one PR ships proven doc, harness, or map corrections.
  • blocked — coverage could not finish or a proven fix could not ship safely. Say exactly what blocked it.

Edit scope

Only edit the verification skill's own directory (its SKILL.md, features/, and any harness scripts it owns). Never edit product code during a run: a behavior the map describes that the app no longer does is either doc drift (fix the map) or a product regression (report it, don't paper over it in docs).

Pass

  1. Locate the target. Find the verification skill to maintain: the project-local skill whose body has launch/drive sections and a feature map (usually .claude/skills/verify-*/). Several candidates → ask which one; none → stop and point at /create-verification-skill instead of inventing a target.
  2. Index hygiene. Read the feature map README and glob its sibling files. Fix missing, extra, duplicate, or dead entries. Lightweight; no generated inventory.
  3. Source wave. One read-only subagent per feature file, launched concurrently. Each explains "how does this user-facing feature work?" from source, flags likely doc drift with citations, and returns one concise live-verification recipe. Children never drive the app and never edit files. Return shape: feature summary / source entry points / likely drift or none / one recipe.
  4. Reconcile. Every feature file has a returned summary. Merge overlapping recipes into as few app states as practical. Spot-check cited drift; don't re-prove clean claims. Sweep recent churn for user-facing surfaces missing from the map — require a concrete source path before calling one missing.
  5. Live pass. Required even when source looks clean. The coordinator owns all driving; follow the verification skill's own launch model — one long-lived instance driven serially for servers and UIs, or a fresh isolated session per drive for short-lived CLIs (the skill's Launch section decides, not this one). Exercise every feature at least once, and hold three invariants the whole pass, whatever the failure: (1) never drive an instance you haven't health-checked since it last did something surprising — doctor before first drive, doctor on each fresh session where sessions are the unit, doctor again after any failed drive, and where doctor can't see the failure (a wedged UI state on a healthy process), reset to a known state or relaunch rather than hoping; (2) evidence captured so far survives every cleanup, checked at its named location, not assumed; (3) nothing a drive started outlives that drive's usefulness — failed-iteration residue is cleaned whether the session is stuck, exited, or shared (for a shared instance, clean the residue, not the instance). A doctor failure caused by skill drift is drift: fix it under edit scope and retry once — restart whatever the fix invalidated, nothing more — before calling the pass blocked. A feature that can't be reached is verified-unreachable only with the concrete prerequisite (auth, entitlement, OS, external state) and the route attempted; if the map omits that prerequisite, that's drift. Any harness fix from triage gets re-driven live before it ships. Final teardown happens after the last drive of the run — including those re-proofs — so nothing outlives the run (evidence stays, per the skill).
  6. Triage. Wrong or missing user-POV description → doc drift, fix it. Working behavior the harness can't drive → harness gap, fix it; a harness fix follows the same helpers rule as generation (scripts executable, invocation documented in the skill body). App behavior that's actually broken → product gap; record it for the user, keep it out of this PR.
  7. Ship or stop. For changed: one PR of proven corrections, re-read every changed file first. For clean or blocked: no PR, report the outcome and the coverage honestly.

Keep concise run notes (features covered, unreachable prerequisites, confirmed drift, outcome) in a scratch location; don't commit them.

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