本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

verify-before-done

Evidence rules for completion claims. Use before ticking an acceptance criterion, ending an implementation run, or writing anything that says something works, passes or is fixed.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md3.3 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Verification Before Completion

Overview

Claiming work is complete without verification is dishonesty, not efficiency.

Core principle: Evidence before claims, always.

The Iron Law

NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE

If you haven't run the verification command in THIS run, you cannot claim it passes. A previous run, "should pass", or "looks correct" is not evidence.

The Gate Function

Before claiming any status or moving any task forward:

  1. IDENTIFY — what command proves this claim?
  2. RUN — execute the full command, fresh and complete.
  3. READ — the full output: exit code, failure count, warnings.
  4. VERIFY — does the output actually confirm the claim? If no: state the real status with evidence.
  5. ONLY THEN — make the claim, with the evidence.

Skipping any step is lying, not verifying.

What Each Claim Requires

ClaimRequiresNot sufficient
Checks passThe component's list_component_checks commands, run in this run, exit 0 — the hand-off gate runs exactly theseA different command you picked yourself
Build succeedsBuild command: exit 0Linter passing, logs look fine
Bug fixedRe-run the original symptom: passesCode changed, assumed fixed
Regression test guards the fixRevert the fix, run the test (MUST FAIL), restore, run again (passes)The test passing once, with the fix already in place
Endpoint works (backend)curl against the running service: status code and bodyCode review of the handler
Screen works (frontend)browser_read_dom with contains: for the element, plus screenshots at the four widthsA build that compiled
Screen works (mobile)mobile_screenshot / mobile_read_ui, or the Flutter web-render fallback when no device is attached"The widget should render"
AC metLine-by-line check of every acceptance criterion against what you just verifiedTests passing

Tests passing is NOT the same as requirements met — re-read every acceptance criterion and confirm each one is actually satisfied.

Handoff

Then close as your prompt says: final message, no comment, no move.

If you cannot show fresh passing output, the task is not done — say what actually failed instead. And do not re-run a check you already have fresh output for: once a build has passed on the code as it stands, running it again proves nothing and costs the run.

Red Flags — STOP

  • Using "should", "probably", "seems to"
  • Expressing satisfaction before verification ("Done!", "Perfect!")
  • Finishing a run without having run the checks in it
  • Relying on partial verification ("the linter passed")
  • Running the same check twice over unchanged code — that is not rigor, it is a loop

Rationalization Prevention

ExcuseReality
"Should work now"RUN the verification.
"I'm confident"Confidence is not evidence.
"Just this once"No exceptions.
"Partial check is enough"Partial proves nothing.
"I'm tired / it's late in the task"Exhaustion is not an excuse.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when writing acceptance criteria for a task - express each as an observable Given/When/Then that QA can execute, including negative cases

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

Use when the diff adds or changes an endpoint, resolver, RPC, job or query that takes an object id, a role check, a request binding or a tenant filter - BOLA/IDOR, function-level authorization, mass assignment and tenant scoping

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

Use on every UI change - semantic HTML, labels for controls, keyboard-navigable dialogs/menus, visible focus, and never color as the only signal

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

Use when a task changes any screen, form, dialog, menu or control - Lighthouse/axe scan of the changed screens, a keyboard walk, and the thresholds that fail a task

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

How to work a task returned with review, QA or UAT findings. Use when a task is in need_revision or PR review comments are in your context.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

Use when deciding whether a request needs an analiz task before implementation - the conditions that require the architect's analysis versus going straight to implementation

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

makifbaysal のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する