verify
Skill4 starsChanged 48 days agoMITView on GitHub
Runs the Forge verify stage — the post-merge health check performed AFTER a PR is merged: switch to master and pull, confirm the merge landed, check CI is green on master, confirm deployments are up, remove the merged worktree, safe-delete the branch, and close the kernel issues the PR resolved. Use when asked to verify a merge went cleanly, confirm post-merge CI health on master, check deployments after merging, clean up a merged branch or worktree, or close the issue now that its PR is merged — and whenever `/verify` is invoked. Strictly the POST-merge stage: use shepherd instead to monitor a still-open PR toward merge, review to fix and resolve PR feedback before merge, ship to push the branch and open the PR, rollback to undo an already-shipped change, status to merely report the current stage without acting, and issue-basics to close an issue unrelated to a just-merged PR.
189 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
- 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 versions189 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 189
- 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
179 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 repository51 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .cursor/rules/permissions-guidance.mdcCursor rule
- claim-safetySkill
- devSkill
- gatesSkill
- hermes-forgeSkill
- issue-basicsSkill
- kernelSkill
- memorySkill
- parallel-deep-researchSkill
- planSkill
- portabilitySkill
- researchSkill
- reviewSkill
- rollbackSkill
- setupSkill
- shepherdSkill
- shipSkill
- smithSkill
- sonarcloud-analysisSkill
- sonarcloudSkill
- statusSkill
- triage-readySkill
- using-forgeSkill
- validateSkill
- verifySkill
- worktreeSkill
- claim-safetySkill
- devSkill
- gatesSkill
- hermes-forgeSkill
- issue-basicsSkill
- kernelSkill
- memorySkill
- parallel-deep-researchSkill
- planSkill
- portabilitySkill
- researchSkill
- reviewSkill
- rollbackSkill
- setupSkill
- shepherdSkill
- shipSkill
- smithSkill
- sonarcloud-analysisSkill
- sonarcloudSkill
- statusSkill
- triage-readySkill
- using-forgeSkill
- validateSkill
- worktreeSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 168 edited versions we read keep these.
12
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 19
Verify that the merge landed correctly and everything is running properly after merge.
- Distinctive: line 54
If no PR found: the merge may not have landed yet — stop and tell the user to merge first
- Very specific: line 55
If the wrong PR appears: user can specify the number directly with gh pr view <number> --json state,mergedAt,mergedBy
- Distinctive: line 63
Check the most recent workflow runs on master:
- Distinctive: line 64
All should be passing or in progress
- Distinctive: line 65
If any failed: identify which workflow and what failed
- Distinctive: line 70
Check if the project has a deployment target:
- Distinctive: line 113
Only run this step after CI is confirmed healthy (Step 3 passed).
- Distinctive: line 121
If the branch name cannot be determined (empty output or error), skip cleanup and tell the user to run git worktree list and clean up …
- Distinctive: line 141
If no worktree is found for that branch, skip gracefully with a note: "Worktree: not found (already removed or never created)".
- Distinctive: line 143
Delete the local branch (safe delete only):
- Distinctive: line 159
Never commit inline: If something is wrong, create a tracking issue:
- Distinctive: line 167
If everything is clean, close all issues referenced in the merged PR.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 168 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 that the merge landed correctly and everything is running properly after merge.
Verify
Chain (HARD-GATE): the successor depends on the change classification (source of truth: lib/workflow/stages.js) — in the post-merge flow (Critical/Standard/Refactor/Simple/Hotfix) NOTHING follows
verify; thedocsflow alone reusesverify→shipas a pre-ship content check.verifyis therefore not universally terminal — a chain-aware harness MUST gate on classification, not blindly follownext.
This skill runs AFTER the user has merged the PR. It checks system health — not documentation (that was handled by the pre-merge gate embedded in /ship and /review).
Usage
/verifyWhat This Skill Does
Step 1: Switch to Master and Pull
git checkout master
git pullConfirm the merge actually landed on master. If the PR isn't merged yet, stop and tell the user to merge first.
Step 2: Confirm PR Is Merged
Detect the PR that produced the current HEAD commit — scope the lookup to that commit's SHA so you don't pick up an unrelated newer merge:
gh pr list --state merged --base master --search "$(git rev-parse HEAD)" --limit 1 --json number,state,mergedAt,mergedBystateshould beMERGED- If no PR found: the merge may not have landed yet — stop and tell the user to merge first
- If the wrong PR appears: user can specify the number directly with
gh pr view <number> --json state,mergedAt,mergedBy
Step 3: Check CI on Master After Merge
gh run list --branch master --limit 5Check the most recent workflow runs on master:
- All should be passing or in progress
- If any failed: identify which workflow and what failed
- Failed CI on master after merge may need a hotfix PR
Step 4: Check Deployments (if applicable)
Check if the project has a deployment target:
# Check deployment status from latest run
gh run list --branch master --limit 1
# Check Vercel deployments for the merged PR (use number from Step 2)
gh pr view <number> --json statusCheckRollupIf deployments exist:
- Are they showing as successful?
- Is the production/preview URL responding?
Step 5: Report Status
If everything is clean:
✅ Merge verified — everything is healthy
PR: #<number> merged by <user> at <time>
CI on master: ✓ All passing
Deployments: ✓ Up (if applicable)
Ready for next feature → run /statusIf issues found:
⚠️ Post-merge issues detected
PR: #<number> merged ✓
CI on master: ✗ <workflow-name> failing
- Error: <description>
- Action needed: <hotfix or investigation>
Deployments: ✗ <deployment> not responding
Next: Create hotfix branch or investigate root causeStep 6: Clean Up Worktree and Branch
Only run this step after CI is confirmed healthy (Step 3 passed).
Get the merged branch name:
gh pr view <number> --json headRefName --jq '.headRefName'If the branch name cannot be determined (empty output or error), skip cleanup and tell the user to run git worktree list and clean up manually.
Find and remove the matching worktree (if it exists):
# Get the worktree path for this exact branch
WORKTREE_PATH=$(git worktree list --porcelain \
| awk -v branch="refs/heads/<branch>" '
/^worktree / { path=substr($0, 10) }
$0 == "branch " branch { print path }
')
if [ -n "$WORKTREE_PATH" ]; then
git worktree remove "$WORKTREE_PATH" --force
echo "Worktree: removed ✓ ($WORKTREE_PATH)"
else
echo "Worktree: not found (already removed or never created) — skipping"
fiIf no worktree is found for that branch, skip gracefully with a note: "Worktree: not found (already removed or never created)".
Delete the local branch (safe delete only):
git branch -d <branch> 2>/dev/null || echo "Branch: already deleted — skipping"The || echo fallback handles the case where the branch is already gone (e.g., deleted by a previous run or the remote), so the command never fails the verify step.
Report cleanup in output:
Worktree: removed ✓
Branch: <branch-name> deleted ✓Step 7: If Issues Found — Create Issue
Never commit inline. If something is wrong, create a tracking issue:
forge create --title="Post-merge: <description of issue>" --type=bug --priority=1Step 8: Close resolved issues (if healthy)
If everything is clean, close all issues referenced in the merged PR.
Auto-detect issues from PR body and branch name:
# Get PR body and branch name
PR_BODY=$(gh pr view <number> --json body --jq '.body')
PR_BRANCH=$(gh pr view <number> --json headRefName --jq '.headRefName')
# Extract issue IDs from PR body
# Matches short form (e.g. "Closes forge-abc") and kernel UUIDs (e.g. "Closes d71a824b-b0a2-...")
# Patterns: "Closes <id>", "Fixes <id>", "Resolves <id>"
SHORT_IDS=$(echo "$PR_BODY" | grep -oiE '(closes|fixes|resolves):?\s+[a-z]+-[a-z0-9]+' | grep -oiE '[a-z]+-[a-z0-9]{3,6}$')
UUID_IDS=$(echo "$PR_BODY" | grep -oiE '(closes|fixes|resolves):?\s+[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{12}' | grep -oiE '[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{12}$')
ISSUE_IDS="$SHORT_IDS $UUID_IDS"
# Validate each ID exists in the kernel
VALID_IDS=""
for id in $ISSUE_IDS; do
if forge show "$id" >/dev/null 2>&1; then
VALID_IDS="$VALID_IDS $id"
fi
done
ISSUE_IDS="$VALID_IDS"
# Also check branch name for an issue ID — extract segment after last /
# then validate with forge show to avoid false matches like "pr-templa"
BRANCH_SLUG=$(echo "$PR_BRANCH" | sed 's|.*/||')
BRANCH_ID=$(echo "$BRANCH_SLUG" | grep -oE '[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{12}|[a-z]+-[a-z0-9]{3,6}' | head -1)
if [ -n "$BRANCH_ID" ] && ! forge show "$BRANCH_ID" >/dev/null 2>&1; then
BRANCH_ID="" # Not a valid issue ID — discard
fiClose each matched issue:
# Close issues found in PR body. Track failures — a close that fails must
# block /verify completion, not be downgraded to a warning.
close_failed=0
for id in $ISSUE_IDS; do
if ! forge close "$id" --reason="Merged and verified on master (PR #<number>)"; then
echo "Warning: could not close $id"
close_failed=1
fi
done
# If no issues found in body, try branch name match (skip if already closed above)
if [ -z "$ISSUE_IDS" ] && [ -n "$BRANCH_ID" ]; then
forge close "$BRANCH_ID" --reason="Merged and verified on master (PR #<number>)" || { echo "Warning: could not close $BRANCH_ID"; close_failed=1; }
elif [ -n "$BRANCH_ID" ] && ! echo "$ISSUE_IDS" | grep -qw "$BRANCH_ID"; then
forge close "$BRANCH_ID" --reason="Merged and verified on master (PR #<number>)" || { echo "Warning: could not close $BRANCH_ID"; close_failed=1; }
fi
# Any intended close that failed → /verify is NOT complete.
if [ "$close_failed" -ne 0 ]; then
echo "✗ One or more issues failed to close — /verify is NOT complete."
exit 1
fiIf no issues detected at all, prompt the user:
⚠ No issue ID found in PR body or branch name.
If this PR closes an issue, run: forge close <id> --reason="Merged and verified on master (PR #<number>)"<HARD-GATE: /verify exit>
Do NOT declare /verify complete until:
1. gh run list --branch master --limit 3 shows actual CI output (not "should be fine")
2. If healthy: issues extracted from PR body/branch and closed (`forge close` run and confirmed)
- If no issue ID found: user was warned and given manual close command
3. If issues found: tracking issue created for every problem
4. Worktree removed (or confirmed already gone) — OR Step 6 was intentionally skipped because CI was unhealthy; if skipped, state explicitly: "cleanup deferred, CI was not healthy"
"It should be fine" is not evidence. Run the command. Show the output.
</HARD-GATE>Rules
- Never commits code — this skill may update issue state after post-merge health is verified
- Never creates PRs — if fixes are needed, that's a new /dev cycle
- Runs after user confirms merge — not before
- Reports honestly — if CI is broken on master, say so clearly
Example Output (Healthy)
✅ Merge verified — everything is healthy
PR: #89 merged by harshanandak at 2026-02-24T14:30:00Z
Branch: feat/auth-refresh deleted ✓
CI on master:
✓ Test Suite (ubuntu, node 24): passing
✓ Test Suite (windows, node 26): passing
✓ ESLint: passing
✓ SonarCloud: passing
✓ CodeQL: passing
Deployments: N/A (no deployment configured)
Ready for next feature → run /statusExample Output (Issues Found)
⚠️ Post-merge issues detected
PR: #89 merged ✓
CI on master:
✓ Test Suite: passing
✗ SonarCloud: quality gate failing
- 2 new code smells introduced
- Action: investigate or create hotfix
Created issue: forge-xyz
"Post-merge: SonarCloud quality gate failing on master after PR #89"
Run /status to assess next stepsIntegration with Workflow
Utility: /status -> Understand current context before starting
Default template:
/plan -> Optional default planner; external planners may satisfy /dev entry
/dev -> Implement each task with subagent-driven TDD
/validate -> Type check, lint, tests, security
/ship -> Push + create PR
/review -> Address PR feedback
/verify -> Post-merge health check
Pre-merge gate: doc updates + CI-green checkpoint embedded in /ship and /review (not a separate stage).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.

