code-change-verification
Skill265 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Run the mandatory verification stack when changes affect runtime code, tests, examples, or build and test behavior in the OpenAI Guardrails Python repository.
- Reads credentials
6 other projects use a version of this, 3 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- yasik/agentlaneedited, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- redis/ioredistheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- openai/openai-guardrails-jstheir own version, first seen Sep 10, 2026
- openai/openai-agents-pythonedited, first seen Sep 8, 2026
- pproenca/unifi-mcptheir own version, first seen Apr 7, 2026
- openai/openai-agents-jsedited, first seen Feb 3, 2026
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 3
- openai/openai-agents-python★ 31k21% same
- openai/openai-agents-js★ 4k23% same
- yasik/agentlane★ 912% same
Wrote their own version · 3
- redis/ioredis★ 15ksame name
- openai/openai-guardrails-js★ 113same name
- pproenca/unifi-mcp★ 2same 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 repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- final-release-reviewSkill
- implementation-final-reviewSkill
- implementation-kickoffSkill
- implementation-strategySkill
- maintainer-reviewSkill
- pr-draft-summarySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
4
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
- Very specific: line 16
Keep this skill at ./.agents/skills/code-change-verification.
- Distinctive: line 22
If any command fails, fix the issue and rerun the complete script.
- Very specific: line 29
When concrete contention is visible, continue useful non-heavy work and check again later.
- Distinctive: line 30
Start automatically once review is clean, the diff is stable, and observable host capacity is available.
- Distinctive: line 42
Run these commands from the repository root in this order:
- Distinctive: line 52
Do not skip a failing step.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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
Code Change Verification
Overview
Mark eligible work complete only after formatting, linting, both configured type checkers, and the test suite pass. Use this skill for runtime code, tests, examples, packaging, and build or test configuration. Skip it for repository metadata or editorial docs unless the user requests the full stack.
This is a post-review final gate. When $implementation-final-review applies, wait for its clean-review condition before running this broad stack.
Quick start
- Keep this skill at
./.agents/skills/code-change-verification. - Codex on macOS/Linux:
/usr/bin/env -u OPENAI_API_KEY bash .agents/skills/code-change-verification/scripts/run.sh. - Other macOS/Linux environments:
bash .agents/skills/code-change-verification/scripts/run.sh. - Windows:
powershell -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -File .agents/skills/code-change-verification/scripts/run.ps1. - The scripts run
make formatfirst. - They then run
make lint,uv run mypy src tests,uv run pyright, andmake tests. - If any command fails, fix the issue and rerun the complete script.
- Confirm completion only when every command succeeds and the final diff contains no formatter-created surprises.
Start condition and host capacity
- During iterative review, use focused tests and a narrowly targeted static check only when the changed boundary requires one.
- Immediately before starting the complete stack, use available read-only task or process evidence to check whether another repository-wide test, typecheck, build, examples runner, or integration command is already active on the same host.
- When concrete contention is visible, continue useful non-heavy work and check again later. Do not create or wait on a repository lock, host-wide mutex, sentinel file, or user-triggered
finalizestep. - Start automatically once review is clean, the diff is stable, and observable host capacity is available. Lack of host telemetry alone is not a blocker.
Environment and API safety
The verification scripts assume repository dependencies are already installed. Run make sync only for a fresh checkout, after dependency files change, or when dependency resolution fails before checks start.
Repository verification and all child processes must remain in the normal Codex workspace sandbox. Never request elevated sandbox permissions for the verification wrapper, and never retry it with broader host access after a failure.
The ordinary test suite must remain hermetic. In Codex, remove inherited OPENAI_API_KEY from the wrapper environment. Do not run live provider calls as part of this verification stack. If a future test requires a live service, keep it out of the default stack and require explicit user approval, the repository's service-account credential boundary, and a separate report.
Manual workflow
Run these commands from the repository root in this order:
make format
make lint
uv run mypy src tests
uv run pyright
make testsDo not skip a failing step. After a fix, rerun the complete sequence so the final result applies to one stable diff.
Resources
scripts/run.sh
Runs the required macOS/Linux sequence, executing independent read-only gates concurrently after formatting and stopping sibling processes when one fails.
scripts/run.ps1
Runs the same required sequence on Windows PowerShell and reports the failing command.
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.

