create-verification-skill
Skill15 starsChanged 15 days agoMITView on GitHub
Create or maintain a repository-local skill for repeatedly verifying real project behavior through its supported browser/app, HTTP/service/API, or CLI/process surfaces. Use when the user explicitly asks for a project verification skill, verification capability, reusable verification journeys, or maintenance of an existing repo-local verification skill. Do not use for ordinary test writing, one-off app runs, or automatically scaffolding a harness because coverage is absent.
77 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claude-sisyphustheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- caidanw/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecodetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- BrightGold70/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- tristanphvn/keeltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- requie/endostacktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use setup-pstack, ketchup-video 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.
bnemaSkillsetup-pstack
Configure which Pi models pstack uses per role. Detects available provider/model specs and writes pstack's user configuration. Use for /setup-pstack, "configure pstack models", or changing pstack model choices.
Also in 25 projects that use this
tristanphvnSkillketchup-video
Catch the user up like /keel:ketchup, with a short silent video of slides for what happened and the waiting calls as text under it. Use for /keel:ketchup-video.
Also in 13 projects that use this
ianclearySkillpoteto-help
Guides users through pstack setup, /poteto-mode, and picking the skill, playbook, or principle for a task. Type /poteto-help with a question.
Also in 14 projects that use this
eryzerzSkillmake-bot-ui
Use when building a custom UI (page, dashboard, buttons) that should wake a Grok Bot over a webhook, when the user must provide a webhook sender key, or when exposing that UI on Tailscale.
Also in 19 projects that use this
ianclearySkillprinciple-explain-the-number
Apply before you trust, report, or act on a number you measured: a speedup, a regression, a throughput, a latency, or an eval result. Find what limits it, and rule out that it measured something other than the work you think.
Also in 27 projects that use this
drafaelSkillin-your-own-words
Restate the user's goals and the problem they are trying to solve to check understanding. Manual invocation only; use when the user explicitly invokes in-your-own-words or requests this understanding check. Do not solve the task or rewrite the assistant's last answer.
Also in 26 projects that use this
Other versions77 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 77
- paperclipai/paperclip★ 112ksame name
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claude-sisyphus★ 41ksame name
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode★ 41ksame name
- milind-soni/OpenMausBot★ 18ksame name
- tester-army/e2e★ 13ksame name
- backnotprop/pstack★ 3.8ksame name
- epam/ketcher★ 932same name
- deadlock-mod-manager/deadlock-mod-manager★ 584same name
- openwong2kim/wmux★ 447same name
- jtaroreh/agystack★ 128same name
67 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 repository53 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- analyze-repoSkill
- architectSkill
- codebase-designSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- commitSkill
- create-prSkill
- debugSkill
- frontendSkill
- implementSkill
- mswSkill
- playwrightSkill
- react-hook-form-auditSkill
- react-hook-formSkill
- reactSkill
- refactorSkill
- researchSkill
- resolving-merge-conflictsSkill
- specSkill
- tailwindSkill
- tanstack-querySkill
- testSkill
- typescriptSkill
- zodSkill
- auditSkill
- neovimSkill
- shell-envSkill
- teachSkill
- tilSkill
- atomic-note-to-mocSkill
- close-daySkill
- create-noteSkill
- goalsSkill
- import-goodreadsSkill
- import-meetingsSkill
- ingestSkill
- memory-recallSkill
- process-inboxSkill
- projectSkill
- save-sessionSkill
- todays-focusSkill
- vault-auditSkill
- vaultSkill
- weekly-reviewSkill
- careerSkill
- check-communicationSkill
- deslopifySkill
- standupSkill
- blogSkill
- broSkill
- docsSkill
- talkSkill
- tweet-todaySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 68 edited versions we read keep these.
5
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 29
If the repository has no established location, propose .agents/skills/<unique-project-verification-name>/SKILL.md.
- Distinctive: line 50
Complete when: every proposed journey states what real behavior it proves, at which boundary, and what remains unsupported.
- Distinctive: line 55
Before any durable write, package/config change, stateful journey, or unsafe action, show the user:
- Distinctive: line 68
Ask for explicit approval of that bounded proposal.
- Very specific: line 76
Create or update the project-local SKILL.md and only necessary approved helpers.
- Very specific: line 86
Use references/examples.md only when a concrete browser, API, CLI, or blocked-case pattern would help shape the project-specific result.
- Distinctive: line 89
Complete when: every approved file exists, the skill has one clear invocation/job, each journey has an observable completion contract, and …
- Very specific: line 95
Run the repository's focused formatting, skill syntax, reference, or registration checks.
- Very specific: line 112
When the user separately approved execution, establish target identity and readiness before driving.
- Distinctive: line 119
If authentication, a browser, infrastructure, target identity, or another required capability is unavailable, report blocked.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 68 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
Create a Project Verification Skill
Produce a reusable project-owned verification skill, not generic test advice. The result is an
actual SKILL.md plus only the approved helpers required to operate it. Prefer the project's
existing commands and harnesses over a new control layer.
Workflow
1. Establish the owner
Inspect the repository before proposing files. Read references/discovery-and-safety.md and
complete its discovery pass.
Find the owning package, repository instructions, installed versions and tools, command help, test support, existing local skills, and any established skill location. Reuse or deliberately update an existing verification skill or harness rather than creating a parallel one.
If the repository has no established location, propose
.agents/skills/<unique-project-verification-name>/SKILL.md. Use a portable project-local path;
do not impose a host-specific directory.
Complete when: the project owner, skill owner/location, current verification assets, exact working directories, and relevant commands are evidenced from the repository.
2. Define the recurring job
Name the precise job the generated skill will repeat. Select only the applicable product surfaces:
- browser or app interaction;
- HTTP, service, or API behavior;
- CLI, TUI, or process behavior.
Define named journey contracts with preconditions, public actions, observable completion, and any
externally visible persisted effect. Read references/generated-skill-contract.md and apply its
complete execution-budget, cancellation, cleanup, port-selection, and blocked-status contract
before designing the artifact. A parser or unit-only claim stays at its programmatic boundary; do
not manufacture a browser journey for it.
Complete when: every proposed journey states what real behavior it proves, at which boundary, and what remains unsupported.
3. Present a bounded proposal
Before any durable write, package/config change, stateful journey, or unsafe action, show the user:
- the exact write set and owner of every artifact;
- substantive generated sections and exact repository commands;
- setup, start, doctor, actions, observations, evidence, and cleanup;
- how the proposal satisfies the complete operational contract in
references/generated-skill-contract.md, including every discovered enforcement mechanism and blocker; - explicit isolated-port selection and how target identity and ownership will be verified;
- behavior claims each journey can and cannot prove;
- any new dependency, fixture, credential mechanism, process, port, data, or external side effect;
- which actions are safe to generate versus separately gated to execute.
Ask for explicit approval of that bounded proposal. Generator invocation is permission to inspect and propose, not blanket permission to modify the target project or drive it.
Complete when: the user has approved the exact durable writes and any separately scoped execution. Stop if a required file or action lies outside that approval.
4. Generate the smallest durable capability
Create or update the project-local SKILL.md and only necessary approved helpers. Use existing
scripts, runners, fixtures, and tools where possible. Give tool-neutral roles alongside actual
commands supported by the host and repository; never invent an interface or require one browser
library everywhere.
Resolve helper paths from the generated skill directory. State the correct repository or monorepo
working directory for every command. Apply references/generated-skill-contract.md as the source
of truth for every operational requirement and blocker. Keep the artifact instructional: no new
daemon, workflow database, control plane, or mandatory index.
Use references/examples.md only when a concrete browser, API, CLI, or blocked-case pattern would
help shape the project-specific result.
Complete when: every approved file exists, the skill has one clear invocation/job, each journey has an observable completion contract, and every applicable operational step has an explicit finite budget enforced by a verified capability or is marked blocked.
5. Check the artifact
Run the repository's focused formatting, skill syntax, reference, or registration checks. Inspect
the diff for unrelated changes and secrets. Check the artifact against the complete operational
contract in references/generated-skill-contract.md. These checks prove that the artifact was
generated and registered correctly; they do not prove a user journey.
Classify the result as:
- proposed — described but not written;
- generated — written and structurally checked;
- exercised — run against the authorized target with the required observations;
- blocked — a named requirement could not be proved, with the missing capability recorded.
Complete when: structural checks pass or their exact failures are reported, and the status does not overstate operational proof.
6. Exercise only authorized safe journeys
When the user separately approved execution, establish target identity and readiness before
driving. Execute the generated skill under the complete operational contract in
references/generated-skill-contract.md. Exercise the workflow on the real authorized surface and
capture action plus resulting state plus required persisted effect. Use the generated contract's
port-selection and owned-process receipt rules; store actual ephemeral runtime values only in the
run receipt.
If authentication, a browser, infrastructure, target identity, or another required capability is unavailable, report blocked. Do not install replacements, weaken acceptance, or label the artifact tested. Preserve sanitized evidence after cleanup.
Complete when: an exercised claim has real observations at the named boundary and all bounded cleanup completed, or the precise timeout, cancellation, cleanup, capability, or other blocker and unverified claims are explicit.
7. Report
Return the generated paths, owner, journeys and supported surfaces, structural commands/results, exercise status, evidence locations, cleanup result, omissions, source provenance, and version uncertainty.
Complete when: another agent can distinguish what was proposed, generated, exercised, and blocked without inference.
Operational contract source
references/generated-skill-contract.md is the single source of truth for the complete generated
artifact and execution contract. Apply it before proposing, generating, checking, exercising, or
reporting operational instructions. When the target repository or host cannot satisfy one of its
requirements, preserve the missing prerequisite and report execution as blocked.
Reference routing
| Priority | Load when | Reference |
| 1 — Required | Inspecting a target repository, choosing ownership/location, proposing writes, or preparing execution | references/discovery-and-safety.md |
| 1 — Required | Designing, generating, checking, or reporting the project-local verification artifact | references/generated-skill-contract.md |
| 2 — Conditional | A small browser, API, CLI, or safe-failure pattern would clarify the project-specific design | references/examples.md |
Boundaries
test owns ordinary test creation, regression coverage, TDD, and executable test evidence.
Browser or runner specialists own one-off interaction and tool syntax. This skill owns the distinct
recurring job of creating or maintaining a repository-local verification skill and its approved
helpers. Missing tests alone do not trigger this skill.
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.

