agentleFS
mayankjain1815-commitsmayankjain1815-commits/CITADEL/skills/verify/SKILL.md

verify

Skill4 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Self-test the Citadel hook pipeline from within a live session. Exercises real tool calls (Write, Edit, Bash, Read) and checks that hooks fired, telemetry accumulated, and no errors occurred. Reports HOOK HEALTH: PASS or HOOK HEALTH: FAIL with a per-hook breakdown.

  • Reads credentials

188 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.

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

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 167 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    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
  1. Very specific:

    After installing Citadel in a new project

    line 26
  2. Distinctive:

    Read the current telemetry state:

    line 32
  3. Distinctive:

    If telemetry directory doesn't exist, note it (init-project may not have run).

    line 39
  4. Distinctive:

    Run these tool calls in sequence.

    line 43
  5. Distinctive:

    After all tool calls complete, read telemetry again:

    line 66
  6. Distinctive:

    First-time run (no baseline): If the files don't exist before the test, they should be created during the test.

    line 110
  7. Distinctive:

    All 3 telemetry checks must pass: timing grew, audit grew, no new errors

    line 121
  8. Very specific:

    If .planning/telemetry/ does not exist, FAIL immediately — do not fabricate counts

    line 124

“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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

/verify — Hook Pipeline Self-Test

Use this when:

  • Hooks were recently updated and you want a live sanity check
  • Something feels wrong (tools seem too slow, quality-gate not firing)
  • After installing Citadel in a new project

Protocol

Step 1: Baseline

Read the current telemetry state:

.planning/telemetry/hook-timing.jsonl  → count lines (baseline_timing)
.planning/telemetry/audit.jsonl        → count lines (baseline_audit)
.planning/telemetry/hook-errors.log    → size in bytes (baseline_errors)

If telemetry directory doesn't exist, note it (init-project may not have run).

Step 2: Exercise hooks

Run these tool calls in sequence. Each exercises a different hook:

  1. Write a temp file at .planning/verify-temp.ts:
    // citadel verify probe
    export const verifyProbe = true;
    → Exercises: PreToolUse (protect-files, governance), PostToolUse (post-edit)
  2. Edit the same file — change true to false: → Exercises: PreToolUse (protect-files, governance), PostToolUse (post-edit)
  3. Bash a harmless read command: echo "verify-probe" → Exercises: PreToolUse (governance)
  4. Read the temp file back → Exercises: PreToolUse (protect-files — should allow, it's not .env)
  5. Delete the temp file: rm .planning/verify-temp.ts or equivalent → Cleanup

Step 3: Check side effects

After all tool calls complete, read telemetry again:

CheckExpectedResult
hook-timing.jsonl grew+2 or more lines (Write + Edit post-hooks)PASS/FAIL
audit.jsonl grew+3 or more lines (Write + Edit + Bash pre-hooks)PASS/FAIL
hook-errors.log unchangedsame size as baselinePASS/FAIL

Step 4: Report

Output a results block:

=== HOOK HEALTH CHECK ===

hook-timing.jsonl:  +N lines  [PASS / FAIL]
audit.jsonl:        +N lines  [PASS / FAIL]
hook-errors.log:    no errors [PASS / FAIL — N new errors]

HOOK HEALTH: PASS

Or if any check fails:

HOOK HEALTH: FAIL

Failing checks:
- hook-timing.jsonl did not grow: PostToolUse hooks may not be firing
  → Verify hooks are installed: node scripts/verify-hooks.js
  → Check settings.json: cat .claude/settings.json | grep PostToolUse

- audit.jsonl did not grow: governance hook may not be firing
  → Check: node hooks_src/governance.js <<< '{}'

Edge Cases

No .planning/telemetry/ directory: Init-project may not have run. Output: "HOOK HEALTH: FAIL — .planning/telemetry/ not found. Run: node hooks_src/init-project.js"

Hooks installed but telemetry still zero: The project may have a harness.json that disables telemetry. Check features.telemetry in .claude/harness.json.

First-time run (no baseline): If the files don't exist before the test, they should be created during the test. Treat "file created" as equivalent to "grew".

What This Does NOT Test

  • Hook correctness on edge cases (use verify-hooks.js for that)
  • Full PreToolUse → tool → PostToolUse sequence isolation (use integration-test.js)
  • Skill output quality (use skill-bench.js --execute)

Quality Gates

  • All 3 telemetry checks must pass: timing grew, audit grew, no new errors
  • Temp file must be cleaned up regardless of pass/fail outcome
  • Report must include exact counts (+N lines), not just PASS/FAIL
  • If .planning/telemetry/ does not exist, FAIL immediately — do not fabricate counts

Contextual Gates

Disclosure: Creates and deletes .planning/verify-temp.ts during the test. No other files modified. Reversibility: green — temp file deleted on completion; no persistent changes. Trust gates: Any — no restrictions.

Exit Protocol

---HANDOFF---
- Hook pipeline: PASS / FAIL
- hook-timing.jsonl: +N lines
- audit.jsonl: +N lines
- hook-errors.log: N new errors (0 expected)
- Reversibility: green — no persistent changes; verify-temp.ts cleaned up
- Next: if FAIL, run node scripts/verify-hooks.js for deeper diagnostics
---

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.