superpowers-verification-before-completion
Skill101 starsChanged 30 days agoMITView on GitHub
About to say done, fixed, or passing? STOP. Load first, show real evidence.
3 other projects use a version of this, 2 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- lucasnscr/issue-to-pr-aitheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- EvovexAI/EvoFlowedited, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- host452b/polishedited, first seen Sep 30, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 2
- EvovexAI/EvoFlow★ 61259% same
- host452b/polish★ 259% same
Wrote their own version · 1
- lucasnscr/issue-to-pr-ai★ 0same name
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 repository12 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- superpowers-brainstormingSkill
- superpowers-diagnosing-superpowersSkill
- superpowers-executing-plansSkill
- superpowers-finishing-a-development-branchSkill
- superpowers-receiving-code-reviewSkill
- superpowers-sync-upstreamSkill
- superpowers-systematic-debuggingSkill
- superpowers-test-driven-developmentSkill
- superpowers-using-git-worktreesSkill
- superpowers-writing-plansSkill
- superpowers-writing-skillsSkill
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 114
Commit, PR, task completion
- Distinctive: line 124
Run the command. Read the output.
≈ “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 Before Completion
Overview
Claiming work complete without verification = dishonesty, not efficiency.
Core principle: Evidence before claims, always.
Break the letter = break the spirit.
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCEHaven't run the verification command in this message? Cannot claim it passes.
The Gate Function
BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:
1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?
2. RUN: Execute the FULL command (fresh, complete) via bash
3. READ: Full output, check exit code, count failures
4. VERIFY: Does output confirm the claim?
- If NO: State actual status with evidence
- If YES: State claim WITH evidence
5. ONLY THEN: Make the claim
Skip any step = lying, not verifyingCommon Failures
| Claim | Requires | Not Sufficient |
| Tests pass | Test command output: 0 failures | Previous run, "should pass" |
| Linter clean | Linter output: 0 errors | Partial check, extrapolation |
| Build succeeds | Build command: exit 0 | Linter passing, logs look good |
| Bug fixed | Test original symptom: passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |
| Regression test works | Red-green cycle verified | Test passes once |
| Subagent completed | VCS diff shows changes | Subagent reports "success" |
| Requirements met | Line-by-line checklist | Tests passing |
Red Flags - STOP
- "should", "probably", "seems to"
- Satisfaction before verification ("Great!", "Perfect!", "Done!", etc.)
- About to commit/push/PR unverified
- Trusting subagent success reports
- Relying on partial verification
- "just this once"
- Tired, want work over
- ANY wording implying success without having run verification
Rationalization Prevention
| Excuse | Reality |
| "Should work now" | RUN the verification |
| "I'm confident" | Confidence ≠ evidence |
| "Just this once" | No exceptions |
| "Linter passed" | Linter ≠ compiler |
| "Subagent said success" | Verify independently |
| "I'm tired" | Exhaustion ≠ excuse |
| "Partial check is enough" | Partial proves nothing |
| "Different words, rule doesn't apply" | Spirit over letter |
Key Patterns
Tests:
✅ [Run test command] [See: 34/34 pass] "All tests pass"
❌ "Should pass now" / "Looks correct"Regression tests (TDD Red-Green):
✅ Write → Run (pass) → Revert fix → Run (MUST FAIL) → Restore → Run (pass)
❌ "I've written a regression test" (without red-green verification)Build:
✅ [Run build] [See: exit 0] "Build passes"
❌ "Linter passed" (linter doesn't check compilation)Requirements:
✅ Re-read plan → Create checklist → Verify each → Report gaps or completion
❌ "Tests pass, phase complete"Subagent delegation:
✅ Subagent reports success → Check VCS diff → Verify changes → Report actual state
❌ Trust subagent reportWhen To Apply
ALWAYS before:
- ANY success/completion claim
- ANY expression of satisfaction
- ANY positive statement about work state
- Commit, PR, task completion
- Next task
- Delegating to subagents
Applies to: exact phrases, paraphrases, synonyms, implications of success, ANY communication suggesting completion/correctness.
The Bottom Line
No shortcuts for verification.
Run the command. Read the output. THEN claim the result.
Non-negotiable.
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.

