Verify completion evidence
Skill event4u-app/agent-config/src/skills/verify-completion-evidence
Universal AI Agent OS — audited skills, governance rules, replayable state. One contract, every host agent.
npx -y skills add event4u-app/agent-config --skill verify-completion-evidenceAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 7 stars7 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when claiming 'done', suggesting a commit, push, or PR — runs the evidence gate so completion claims come from fresh output in this message, not memory or earlier runs.
SKILL.md
9.3 KB, ~2.2k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
verify-completion-evidence
When to use
- Just before claiming a task, feature, fix, or refactor is complete
- Just before proposing
/commit,/create-pr, or pushing - Before answering "is it ready?", "can I merge?", "does it work?"
- After a sequence of edits, when next step would be reporting to the user
- Whenever the wording "should work", "looks good", "probably fine" is about to appear in a reply
Do NOT use when:
- Still actively editing — run targeted tests, not the full gate
- Pure documentation changes with no executable impact
- The user explicitly asks for a draft / exploration, not a final answer
Goal
Make every completion claim traceable to captured output from this message. No claim survives unless the command that proves it was run and its output was read inside the current turn.
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH EVIDENCE IN THIS MESSAGE.
"I already ran it earlier in the conversation" does not count. Earlier runs are stale the moment another edit lands.
Procedure
1. Identify the claim you are about to make
Examples: "all tests pass", "this is ready for PR", "the refactor is done", "the bug is fixed".
Each claim maps to a specific verification command. Write down the mapping before running anything:
| Claim | Evidence command |
|---|---|
| "tests pass" | full or targeted test suite |
| "no static errors" | project's type-checker on changed scope (PHPStan, tsc --noEmit, mypy / pyright, go vet, cargo check) |
| "style is clean" | project's linter + formatter (ECS / Prettier / ESLint / Ruff / Black / gofmt / rustfmt) |
| "no automated refactor pending" | project's auto-refactor dry-run if one exists (Rector for PHP — otherwise skip this row) |
| "endpoint works" | curl / Postman / integration test output |
| "UI renders" | Playwright snapshot or manual browser check |
| "bug is fixed" | regression test passes |
2. Run the command fresh
- Run against the current working tree, not a cached summary.
- If the project runs commands inside a container or VM (Docker, Devcontainer, Vagrant), run them there — not on the host. See
dockerandtests-execute. - Use targeted runs during iteration (
--filter=,--testNamePattern). Run the full suite only in the final verification pass.
3. Read the full output
- Check the exit code.
- Count failures, errors, warnings.
- Do not rely on the last line — scroll through the output for deprecations, skipped tests, silent retries.
4. Match output against the claim
Ask: "Does this output actually support what I am about to say?"
- 248/250 tests passed with 2 skipped → do not say "all green"; name the skips.
- Type-checker exit 0 but only analyzed one file → do not say "no static errors"; name the scope that was checked.
curlreturned 200 → check the body, not just the status.
5. Only then make the claim
Reference the evidence: "Tests: 250/250 passed. Type-checker: 0 errors on the changed scope." — not "everything looks good".
The end-of-work sequence
Gate zero: when quality.local_auto_run is false or missing (the
default), steps 2–3 below do NOT run — the user runs quality tools
manually and remote CI is the authoritative gate (see
quality-tools § Execution policy). Run
only the narrowest probe the claim needs (step 1, a curl, a syntax
check on the edited file) and close with "quality gates delegated to
remote CI" — never a pass claim for tools that did not run. The full
sequence applies when local_auto_run: true:
- Targeted tests — the test(s) covering the changed code pass.
- Full test suite — only after targeted pass is green.
- Static analysis pipeline — run the project's type-checker → auto-refactor dry-run (if any) → linter / formatter → type-checker (second pass catches issues the refactor / formatter may have introduced).
- Fix any output from steps 1–3 and restart the sequence.
- Only then: claim completion or suggest
/commit, push, or PR.
Do not run the full quality pipeline between intermediate edits — it burns time and tokens. Use it once, at the end.
→ For the exact PHP commands (PHPStan → Rector → ECS → PHPStan): see quality-tools.
→ For TS / JS, Python, Go, Rust pipelines: the project's Taskfile.yml / package.json scripts / Makefile is the source of truth — read it before improvising.
Minimum evidence per task type
| Task type | Required evidence |
|---|---|
| Code change (logic) | Targeted tests + project's type-checker on changed scope |
| New feature | Tests (new + suite) + type-checker + smoke check (curl / UI / integration probe) |
| Bug fix | Regression test (RED → GREEN) + full suite |
| Refactoring | Full suite + type-checker + auto-refactor dry-run if available |
| Config / env change | Relevant command or service output (not just file diff) |
| Migration | Migration run output + rollback dry-run + tests |
| API endpoint | HTTP response body + status + content-type |
| Frontend component | Rendered state (Playwright or manual) + unit tests |
| Documentation only | No verification needed |
Never accept as proof: "should work", "looks correct", "the logic is sound", "compiles" (unless compilation itself is the contract).
Output format
When reporting completion to the user:
- What was changed — one line summary per changed file / component
- Verification run — the exact command and its exit code
- Result — numeric breakdown (tests passed/failed/skipped, errors, warnings)
- Caveats — anything the output flagged but you chose to accept
- Untracked files — if
git status --shortshows any untracked files in the working tree, list them verbatim in the report. This prevents silently-shipped artefacts (logs, scratch scripts, ad-hoc notes) from disappearing into a future commit. Empty list means omit the section. - Next step — e.g. "Ready for
/commit" or "Awaiting review"
Gotchas
- A "no output" result from a linter is not proof it ran — check the exit code and the analyzed-file count.
- Silencing a warning with
@phpstan-ignore-next-line,// @ts-expect-error,# type: ignore, or//nolintwithout a reason code passes the linter but defers the real problem. - Running tests with
--stop-on-failurethen reporting "passed" — it only ran until the first failure; the green streak after it is unexamined. - Cached static-analysis results (
--cachedirectories) can report clean after you have broken something; clear the cache when the change is large. - Running the test suite on the wrong branch (forgot to switch or
rebase) — verify
git statusandgit log -1before the final gate. - A previously green static-analysis run in the same conversation is stale as soon as any edit lands. Run it again.
Red flags — STOP and run the gate
- About to write "done", "ready", "works", "passes" without a command-output reference in the same message
- About to suggest
/commit/ push / PR without a verification block - Relying on an earlier-in-conversation test run
- Partial evidence (tests green, type-checker / linter not run — or vice versa)
- "The failing test is unrelated, let me skip it" — verify first, then decide
- Reporting a green run by paraphrasing instead of quoting exit code and counts
Do NOT
- Do NOT claim completion without running the mapping command in this message
- Do NOT trust a summary written earlier in the conversation
- Do NOT suppress warnings or skip tests to pass the gate
- Do NOT report only the last line of output — read the whole thing
- Do NOT run the full quality pipeline between intermediate edits —
and under
quality.local_auto_run: false(the default) do NOT run it at the end either; remote CI is the gate
When to hand over to another skill
- Exact PHP quality commands (PHPStan / Rector / ECS) →
quality-tools - Running tests inside a container / VM →
tests-execute - Writing the regression test that the gate requires →
test-driven-development - Diagnosing why the gate failed →
systematic-debugging - Committing once the gate is green →
git-workflow
Validation checklist
Before sending a completion message:
- Every claim in the message maps to a command run in this turn
- Exit code of each command is read and matches the claim
- Output is quoted with numeric counts, not paraphrased
- No warnings or skips are hidden
- Targeted tests green → full suite green → quality pipeline clean
(
local_auto_run: trueonly; under the defaultfalsestate "quality gates delegated to remote CI" instead) -
git statusreflects only the intended change set - If
git status --shortshows untracked files, the report lists them verbatim under "Untracked files"
What ships with it: 1 file
786 B alongside SKILL.md
evals/
- evals.json786 B