verify
Skill808 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Run a comprehensive 7-phase verification pipeline for .NET projects: build, analyzers, antipattern detection, tests, security, formatting, and diff review. Each phase produces PASS/FAIL with actionable output and the pipeline short-circuits on critical failures. Also the authority on verification strategy: which phases to run for a given change, quality gates, and fix-and-retry loops. Use when: "verify", "check everything", "is this ready", "pre-PR check", "run all checks", "quality gate", "verification strategy", "which checks should run", or after completing a feature or refactor.
- Reads credentials
188 other projects use a version of this.
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
- pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflowtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use instinct-export, instinct-import and 9 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
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
Jurel89Skillai-slop-cleaner
Clean AI-generated code slop with a regression-safe, deletion-first workflow and optional reviewer-only mode
Also in 4 projects that use this
- +1 more from TheKREATORS
Other versions188 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 188
- 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
178 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 repository57 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .claude/rules/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- .codex/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .opencode/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .cursor/rules/dotnet-rules.mdCursor rule
- api-versioningSkill
- arch-checkSkill
- architecture-advisorSkill
- aspireSkill
- authenticationSkill
- avaloniaSkill
- build-fixSkill
- cachingSkill
- checkpointSkill
- ci-cdSkill
- clean-architectureSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- configurationSkill
- console-cliSkill
- container-publishSkill
- convention-learnerSkill
- dddSkill
- dependency-injectionSkill
- desktop-mvvmSkill
- de-sloppifySkill
- dockerSkill
- dotnet-initSkill
- ef-coreSkill
- error-handlingSkill
- health-checkSkill
- httpclient-factorySkill
- instinct-systemSkill
- loggingSkill
- messagingSkill
- migrateSkill
- minimal-apiSkill
- modern-csharpSkill
- native-aotSkill
- openapiSkill
- opentelemetrySkill
- outdatedSkill
- planSkill
- project-setupSkill
- project-structureSkill
- resilienceSkill
- scaffoldSkill
- scalarSkill
- security-scanSkill
- serilogSkill
- specSkill
- tddSkill
- testingSkill
- token-reportSkill
- vertical-sliceSkill
- workflow-masterySkill
- wrap-upSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 167 edited versions we read keep these.
7
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 39
After completing a feature, bug fix, or major refactor
- Distinctive: line 40
Before creating a pull request -- non-negotiable, full pipeline
- Distinctive: line 41
After merging upstream changes or updating dependencies
- Distinctive: line 42
When the user says "verify", "check everything", "is this ready", "run all checks"
- Distinctive: line 58
When in doubt, run all 7. Extra phases cost minutes.
- Distinctive: line 69
If the build fails, STOP. Report errors and fix before continuing -- nothing downstream is meaningful on code that does not compile.
- Very specific: line 76
Use the Roslyn MCP get_diagnostics tool, scoped to changed files/projects (full solution for cross-cutting changes).
- Very specific: line 86
Use the Roslyn MCP detect_antipatterns tool on changed files (full project for broad changes).
- Distinctive: line 102
If no test project exists: SKIP with a recommendation to add tests.
“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 -- 7-Phase Verification Pipeline
What
Runs a sequential, 7-phase verification pipeline that catches issues at every level -- from compiler errors to subtle antipatterns to formatting drift. Each phase produces an explicit PASS, WARN, or FAIL with details. "It looks fine" is not a verification result; a table of statuses is. Critical failures (Phase 1 build, Phase 4 tests) short-circuit the pipeline because later phases cannot produce meaningful results on broken code.
The pipeline answers one question: "Is this code ready for review?"
| Phase | Tool | What It Catches | Critical |
| 1. Build | dotnet build | Compilation errors, missing references | Yes |
| 2. Diagnostics | get_diagnostics (MCP) | New analyzer warnings, nullability issues | FAIL on new errors |
| 3. Antipatterns | detect_antipatterns (MCP) | async void, sync-over-async, DateTime.Now, more | No |
| 4. Tests | dotnet test | Failing tests, regressions | Yes |
| 5. Security | dotnet list package --vulnerable + scan | Secrets, SQL injection, missing auth, vulnerable packages | FAIL on critical/high |
| 6. Format | dotnet format --verify-no-changes | Style drift, formatting inconsistencies | No |
| 7. Diff Review | git diff analysis | Accidental changes, debug leftovers, TODOs | No |
When
- After completing a feature, bug fix, or major refactor
- Before creating a pull request -- non-negotiable, full pipeline
- After merging upstream changes or updating dependencies
- When the user says "verify", "check everything", "is this ready", "run all checks"
- As the final step before marking a task complete
Which Phases to Run
Full pipeline is the default. For scoped changes, run a subset:
| Scenario | Phases | Notes |
| Feature complete / Pre-PR / new endpoint | All 7 | No shortcuts |
| Bug fix | 1, 2, 4 | Add a test first if none covers it |
| After refactor | 1, 2, 3, 4 | Correctness focus; add 5-7 if security-sensitive |
| Dependency update | 1, 4, 5 | Build, tests, vulnerability scan |
| Config or test-only change | 1, 4 | Build and test |
| Formatting only | 6 | Format check is sufficient |
When in doubt, run all 7. Extra phases cost minutes; a missed security issue costs days of incident response. Never cherry-pick phases because a change "looks safe".
How
Phase 1: Build (CRITICAL -- short-circuits)
dotnet build --no-restore --verbosity quiet- If the build fails, STOP. Report errors and fix before continuing -- nothing downstream is meaningful on code that does not compile.
- Capture the warning count even on PASS; new warnings are tracked in Phase 2.
- Output: PASS (0 errors) or FAIL (with error list)
Phase 2: Diagnostics
Use the Roslyn MCP get_diagnostics tool, scoped to changed files/projects
(full solution for cross-cutting changes). Compare against baseline -- flag only
NEW warnings introduced by the current changes. Common findings: CS8600/CS8602
(nullability), CS0219 (unused variable).
Output: PASS (0 new) / WARN (new warnings) / FAIL (new errors). Treat new warnings as work -- today's CS8600 is next month's production NullReferenceException.
Phase 3: Antipattern Detection
Use the Roslyn MCP detect_antipatterns tool on changed files (full project for
broad changes). Catches: async void, sync-over-async (.Result,
.GetAwaiter().GetResult()), new HttpClient(), DateTime.Now/UtcNow instead
of TimeProvider, broad catch (Exception), string interpolation in logging,
missing CancellationToken, EF read queries without AsNoTracking.
Output: PASS (0 findings) / WARN (findings) / FAIL (critical antipatterns)
Phase 4: Tests (CRITICAL -- short-circuits)
dotnet test --no-build --verbosity quiet- Full suite, or scoped to affected test projects for large solutions.
- Any failing test is a FAIL -- no exceptions. Stop and fix before later phases.
- If no test project exists: SKIP with a recommendation to add tests.
Output: PASS (all green) or FAIL (failing test names + error messages)
Phase 5: Security Scan
dotnet list package --vulnerable --include-transitiveThen review changed files for: hardcoded secrets/connection strings/API keys,
SQL injection (raw SQL without parameterization), missing [Authorize] on
endpoints that need it, permissive CORS, missing input validation, disabled
HTTPS or certificate validation.
Output: PASS / WARN (medium/low findings) / FAIL (critical/high vulnerabilities)
Phase 6: Format Check
dotnet format --verify-no-changes --verbosity quietReports drift without auto-fixing. To resolve, run dotnet format and include
the changes in the commit. If no .editorconfig exists, note it as a recommendation.
Output: PASS / WARN (with file list)
Phase 7: Diff Review
Analyze git diff --stat and git diff (staged + unstaged) for:
- Accidental or unrelated file changes (
.vs/,bin/,obj/,.env, secrets) - Debug leftovers (
Console.WriteLine,#if DEBUGin production paths) - Unresolved TODO/HACK/FIXME markers
- Scope mismatch -- changes must match the task/PR description
Output: PASS (clean, matches intent) / WARN (with findings)
Fix-and-Retry Loop
A single pass rarely produces all-green. The loop is the point:
- IDENTIFY -- which phase failed, and the specific error
- FIX -- make the minimal change that resolves it
- RE-RUN -- from Phase 1 if the fix changed code; otherwise from the failed phase
- REPEAT -- until all phases pass, or an issue needs user input
Final Summary
## Verification Results
| Phase | Result | Details |
|-------|--------|---------|
| 1. Build | PASS | 0 errors, 0 warnings |
| 2. Diagnostics | PASS | 0 new diagnostics |
| 3. Antipatterns | WARN | 1 missing CancellationToken |
| 4. Tests | PASS | 47 passed, 0 failed |
| 5. Security | PASS | No findings |
| 6. Format | PASS | Clean |
| 7. Diff Review | WARN | 1 TODO marker found |
**Verdict: READY FOR REVIEW** (with 2 non-blocking warnings)Verdicts: READY FOR REVIEW (all PASS, or only non-blocking WARNs) or NEEDS FIXES (any FAIL, with specific remediation steps). For pre-PR runs, include the verification report in the PR description.
Example
User: /verify
Claude: Running 7-phase verification pipeline...
Phase 1: Build ............ PASS (0 errors)
Phase 2: Diagnostics ...... PASS (0 new warnings)
Phase 3: Antipatterns ..... WARN
- src/Features/Orders/CreateOrder.cs:42 -- DateTime.Now usage, use TimeProvider
Phase 4: Tests ............ PASS (23 passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped)
Phase 5: Security ......... PASS
Phase 6: Format ........... PASS
Phase 7: Diff Review ...... PASS
Verdict: READY FOR REVIEW (1 non-blocking warning)
Recommendation: Replace DateTime.Now with TimeProvider on line 42 before
merging. Not blocking, but it will fail the antipattern check in CI.Related
/build-fix-- Auto-fix build errors when Phase 1 fails/code-review-- Multi-dimensional review once verification passes/health-check-- Whole-project graded assessment (beyond this change set)
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.

