agentleFS
Sign inStart free
ilang-aiilang-ai/autocode/skills/verify/SKILL.md

verify

Skill106 starsChanged 31 days agoMITView on GitHub

S5 of see-it-ship-it: prove it works before saying so. Silent quality checks after every feature, a full review of every file before save and deploy, and the acceptance table (check / expected / actual / match) run on the local build and again on the live URL. Never 'tests passed'.

188 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

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.
  • TheKREATORSSkill

    instinct-export

    Export instincts from project/global scope to a file

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • TheKREATORSSkill

    instinct-import

    Import instincts from file or URL into project/global scope

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AviadPSkill

    risk-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-tobalinaSkill

    build-fix

    Fix build and compilation errors systematically. Run when build fails.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • AaravChadhaSkill

    secure

    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

  • ArvorCoSkill

    specify

    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

The file

Create a free account to mount
Files
SKILL.md

verify — S5: show the table, never say "tests passed"

[PROTOCOL:iLang|v=5.0|layer=declaration]

::PRIOR{dimension:completion|default:assume_incomplete|authority:system|scope:@JOURNEY} ::PRIOR{dimension:completion|default:not_live_until_url_opened_and_acceptance_rerun|authority:system|scope:@JOURNEY}

::GENE{verify|conf:confirmed|scope:global} T:check_after_every_feature|silently|fix_minor_things_without_saying T:run_tests_if_a_framework_exists|never_claim_a_run_that_did_not_happen T:full_review_before_save_and_deploy|every_file|logic|edges|security|hardcoded_values T:acceptance_runner_is_a_fixed_build_output|tool:product-study/scripts/acceptance_run.py T:checks_file_next_to_the_build|acceptance.js|acceptance.py|one_json_row_per_check T:table=check|expected|actual|match|readable_by_a_non_technical_person T:user_checks_listed_as_actions_to_perform|not_as_tests_passed T:fix_then_rerun_until_all_match|before_ship T:rerun_on_the_live_url_after_ship T:human_readable_commit_messages A:report_tests_passed⇒show_expected_vs_actual A:claim_tests_passed_without_running⇒reject A:announce_that_you_are_checking⇒silent A:say_tests_failed_to_the_user⇒fix_first_then_report A:partial_review⇒full_review A:skip_review_on_save⇒never A:no_headless_browser⇒rules_block_checks_in_node_or_python

::ACTIVATE{verify} ON:feature_complete ON:before_save ON:before_deploy ON:S4-build.step_complete ON:S6-ship.url_live ON:session_end

::STATE{@ACCEPT, the acceptance table}

[TEST:@ACCEPT|src=@LOCAL]=>[CHEK:@ACCEPT|whr=all_match]=>[Ω:@USER|fmt=text|typ=table]

::EVIDENCE{id:v1|deliverable:site|kind:test_output|ref:acceptance_table_local|verified_by:@TOOL|result:all_match} ::EVIDENCE{id:v2|deliverable:site|kind:test_output|ref:acceptance_table_live|verified_by:@TOOL|result:all_match} ::STATUS{@MVP|state:claimed_complete|evidence:v1|by:@AGENT|authority:proposal} ::STATUS{@MVP|state:verified|evidence:v2|by:@TOOL|authority:runtime}

python3 skills/product-study/scripts/acceptance_run.py <site_dir>                 # local build
python3 skills/product-study/scripts/acceptance_run.py <site_dir> --url <live>    # after ship

::SAY{@AUTOCODE→@USER}{ table: "5 自动加速 10000 次更新后速度 13.001 13.001 ✓ 一致 … 8/8 一致" to_user: "机器能查的 8 项全部一致。剩下请你亲手点：开始、空格跳、拖滑块、撞了重开。" }

Powered by iLang v5.0 | ilang.ai

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