completion-gate
Skill0 starsChanged 51 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing — before committing, creating PRs, or closing tickets. Requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
3 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- NoobyGains/godmodetheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- tomwangowa/agent-skillsedited, first seen Oct 21, 2026
- ldaume/agentic-engineering-harnesstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- tomwangowa/agent-skills★ 217% same
Wrote their own version · 2
- NoobyGains/godmode★ 118same name
- ldaume/agentic-engineering-harness★ 3same 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.
- authoring-skillsSkill
- deep-researchSkill
- design-interviewSkill
- domain-glossarySkill
- dual-axis-reviewSkill
- finish-handoffSkill
- hypothesis-debuggingSkill
- seam-designSkill
- seam-driven-tddSkill
- tracer-planSkill
- using-waypowerSkill
- waymapSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
1
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 20
If you haven't run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.
- Very specific: line 128
Every waypower skill ends in an internal checklist that feeds this gate (layered verification).
“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
Completion Gate
The sole exit ritual for any completion claim in waypower. Every other skill's internal checklist feeds this gate; none replaces it.
Core principle: Evidence before claims, always.
Violating the letter of this rule is violating the spirit of this rule.
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCEIf you haven't run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.
The Gate Function
BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:
1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?
2. RUN: Execute the FULL command (fresh, complete)
3. READ: Full output, check exit code, count failures
4. VERIFY: Does output confirm the claim?
- If NO: State actual status with evidence
- If YES: State claim WITH evidence
5. ONLY THEN: Make the claim
Skip any step = lying, not verifyingCommon Failures
| Claim | Requires | Not Sufficient |
| Tests pass | Test command output: 0 failures | Previous run, "should pass" |
| Linter clean | Linter output: 0 errors | Partial check, extrapolation |
| Build succeeds | Build command: exit 0 | Linter passing, logs look good |
| Bug fixed | Test original symptom: passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |
| Regression test works | Red-green cycle verified | Test passes once |
| Agent completed | VCS diff shows changes | Agent reports "success" |
| Requirements met | Line-by-line checklist | Tests passing |
| Ticket done | Acceptance criteria each verified | Subtasks checked off |
Red Flags — STOP
- Using "should", "probably", "seems to"
- Expressing satisfaction before verification ("Great!", "Perfect!", "Done!", etc.)
- About to commit/push/PR/close a ticket without verification
- Trusting agent success reports
- Relying on partial verification
- Thinking "just this once"
- Tired and wanting work over
- ANY wording implying success without having run verification
Rationalization Prevention
| Excuse | Reality |
| "Should work now" | RUN the verification |
| "I'm confident" | Confidence ≠ evidence |
| "Just this once" | No exceptions |
| "Linter passed" | Linter ≠ compiler |
| "Agent said success" | Verify independently |
| "I'm tired" | Exhaustion ≠ excuse |
| "Partial check is enough" | Partial proves nothing |
| "The skill's own checklist is complete" | Checklists feed this gate; they never replace it |
| "Different words so rule doesn't apply" | Spirit over letter |
Key Patterns
Tests:
✅ [Run test command] [See: 34/34 pass] "All tests pass"
❌ "Should pass now" / "Looks correct"Regression tests (red-green honesty):
✅ Write → Run (passes) → Revert fix → Run (MUST FAIL) → Restore → Run (passes)
❌ "I've written a regression test" (without red-green verification)Build:
✅ [Run build] [See: exit 0] "Build passes"
❌ "Linter passed" (linter doesn't check compilation)Requirements:
✅ Re-read spec/plan → Create checklist → Verify each item → Report gaps or completion
❌ "Tests pass, phase complete"Agent delegation:
✅ Agent reports success → Check VCS diff → Verify changes → Report actual state
❌ Trust agent reportWhen To Apply
ALWAYS before:
- ANY variation of success/completion claims
- ANY expression of satisfaction
- ANY positive statement about work state
- Committing, PR creation, task completion
- Closing or updating a tracker ticket's status
- Moving to the next task
- Delegating to agents
Rule applies to:
- Exact phrases
- Paraphrases and synonyms
- Implications of success
- ANY communication suggesting completion/correctness
Related Skills
seam-driven-tdd— the red-green loop this gate audits for honesty- Every waypower skill ends in an internal checklist that feeds this gate (layered verification); passing this gate means the claim carries evidence, not confidence
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.

