verification-gates
Skill8 starsChanged 17 days agoMITView on GitHub
This skill should be used when handling verification steps, quality gates, pre-commit checks, test failures, lint errors, build verification, or mandatory validation before task completion.
- Reads credentials
3 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- MediaPlural/agent-proventheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- pablolok/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- Kshitijpalsinghtomar/depth-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 1, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 3
- Kshitijpalsinghtomar/depth-skills★ 5same name
- MediaPlural/agent-proven★ 1same name
- pablolok/claude-skills★ 1same 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
- .claude/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-behavior-constraintsSkill
- agentsview-usageSkill
- evidence-driven-workSkill
- explainer-design-systemSkill
- exploration-strategySkill
- graphify-usageSkill
- personal-kb-usageSkill
- prompt-refinementSkill
- skill-agent-mappingSkill
- task-classificationSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
10
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
- Distinctive: line 17
Non-Negotiable Quality: Every code change must pass all applicable gates
- Distinctive: line 21
Fail-Fast, Fix-First: When any gate fails, work stops until resolved
- Distinctive: line 87
Run test suite with appropriate framework
- Distinctive: line 89
Run linters if present
- Distinctive: line 155
Run verification after every significant change
- Distinctive: line 158
Add tests for new features
- Distinctive: line 159
Run full suite before PR
- Distinctive: line 166
Commit with failing tests
- Distinctive: line 187
User explicitly requests skip: - Must be documented
- Distinctive: line 189
Task is purely exploratory: - No production impact
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 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
Verification Gates
Overview
Verification gates are mandatory quality checkpoints that must pass before any implementation work is considered complete. These gates prevent broken code from being committed, ensure type safety, maintain code style consistency, and validate that all tests pass.
Owner Agent: Alphonse (Verifier Agent)
Key Principles
- Non-Negotiable Quality: Every code change must pass all applicable gates
- Automated Enforcement: Gates are triggered automatically via hooks
- Clear Feedback: Failures provide actionable error messages
- Project-Aware: Commands adapt to detected project type and tooling
- Fail-Fast, Fix-First: When any gate fails, work stops until resolved
Verification Hierarchy
Loid (Executor) Alphonse (Verifier)
| |
Quick sanity tests Full verification gate
during implementation before completion
| |
+----------> Handoff >----+Gate Types
Pre-Commit Gates
| Check | Example Command | Timeout |
| Lint | npm run lint / ruff check | 30s |
| Format | npm run format:check / black --check | 15s |
| Quick Tests | Changed file tests only | 60s |
Pre-Complete Gates
| Check | Example Command | Timeout |
| Full Test Suite | npm test / pytest | 300s |
| Type Checking | npx tsc --noEmit / mypy . | 120s |
| Linting | Full codebase lint | 60s |
| Build | npm run build / python -m build | 180s |
Security Gates
Triggered by changes to sensitive files or security-critical code:
| Check | Trigger | Action |
| Credential Scan | *.env, *secret*, *.key | Block + Alert |
| Permission Check | Auth/ACL code | Require review |
| Dependency Audit | Package files | npm audit / pip-audit |
Verification Commands
Quick Reference by Language
| Action | Node.js | Python | Go | Rust |
| Test | npm test | pytest | go test ./... | cargo test |
| Types | npx tsc --noEmit | mypy . | go build | cargo check |
| Lint | npm run lint | ruff check . | golangci-lint run | cargo clippy |
| Build | npm run build | python -m build | go build | cargo build |
For complete command reference, see references/verification-commands.md.
Verification Process
Alphonse Verification Steps
- Identify project type (Node.js, Python, Go, Rust, Java)
- Run test suite with appropriate framework
- Execute type checking if configured
- Run linters if present
- Attempt production build
- Report structured results
Standard Output Format
## Verification Results
### Tests
- Status: [PASS | FAIL]
- Output: [Summary of test execution]
### Type Check
- Status: [PASS | FAIL | SKIPPED (<why>) | COVERED (Lawliet)]
- Errors: [List of type errors if any]
### Lint
- Status: [PASS | FAIL | SKIPPED (<why>) | COVERED (Lawliet)]
- Warnings: [Count and summary]
### Build
- Status: [PASS | FAIL | SKIPPED (<why>)]
- Issues: [Build errors if any]
### Overall: [VERIFIED | FAILED | ENVIRONMENT_BLOCKED]COVERED (Lawliet): in the parallel /orchestrate Phase 4+5 flow, Lawliet runs type check and lint concurrently, so Alphonse reports them as covered instead of re-running them.
Failure Handling
Failure Severity
| Type | Severity | Action |
| Test Failure | BLOCKING | Fix and re-run |
| Type Error | BLOCKING | Resolve types |
| Lint Error | BLOCKING | Auto-fix or manual |
| Build Failure | BLOCKING | Fix compilation |
| Security Alert | CRITICAL | Immediate remediation |
| Timeout | WARNING | Retry up to 2x (30s apart), then report FAILED |
| Flaky Test | WARNING | Retry 3x, then fix |
These are gate-failure labels for Alphonse's verification. They are separate from the ERROR/WARNING/INFO review-finding scale. The machine-read verdict is Alphonse's ### Overall: VERIFIED | FAILED | ENVIRONMENT_BLOCKED.
Escalation Path
Alphonse's ### Overall verdict decides the route:
- VERIFIED: proceed.
- FAILED: Loid fixes within the capped review-fix rounds, then re-verify.
- ENVIRONMENT_BLOCKED: warn and proceed with the caveat (not routed to Loid).
At the round cap, open failures go to the Phase 6 report, and the orchestrator pauses only when one is unsafe to ship.
For detailed failure protocols, see references/failure-handling.md.
Best Practices
DO
- Run verification after every significant change
- Fix failures immediately
- Trust Alphonse's verdict
- Add tests for new features
- Run full suite before PR
DON'T
- Skip verification to save time
- Suppress type errors with
any - Disable lint rules without justification
- Commit with failing tests
- Use
--no-verifyflag - Mark tasks complete without verification
Gate Selection Guide
| Scenario | Gate Type | Checks Run |
| Small code fix | Pre-Commit | Lint, format, affected tests |
| New feature complete | Pre-Complete | Full suite, types, lint, build |
| Security-related change | Security | Credential scan, audit, permissions |
| Cross-service change | Integration | E2E, contracts, compatibility |
Override Rules
Verification gates can ONLY be skipped when:
- User explicitly requests skip - Must be documented
- No code changes were made - Documentation-only tasks
- Task is purely exploratory - No production impact
Override Documentation Required:
## Verification Override
Reason: [Explicit reason for skipping]
Requested by: [User or escalation source]
Risk Assessment: [Low/Medium/High]
Compensating Controls: [What will catch issues later]Multi-reviewer disagreement (Codex co-review)
Disagreement rule: See the canonical truth table and Divergence Cap in
references/codex-co-review.md. The summary: any cited Lawliet
ERROR/WARNING blocks (even under APPROVED); Codex flips the verdict only with a file:line-cited ERROR/WARNING — INFO
is advisory; Codex runs only under standard/thorough with codex.available: true.
Additional Resources
Reference Files
- references/verification-commands.md - Complete command reference
- references/project-detection.md - Project type detection details
- references/failure-handling.md - Failure handling protocols
- references/codex-co-review.md -
/orchestratePhase 4 Codex co-review, truth table, Divergence Cap - references/intent-ledger.md -
/orchestratePhase 6 Intent Ledger template
Examples
- examples/verification-scenarios.md - Worked verification examples
Related Files
| File | Purpose |
scripts/load-project-context.sh | Project type detection |
hooks/scripts/verify-completion.sh | Pre-complete gate implementation |
hooks/scripts/validate-changes.sh | Security validation |
agents/Alphonse.md | Verifier agent definition |
Related Skills
- task-classification: Determines when verification is required
- agent-behavior-constraints: Model routing and tool access
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.

