Skip to main content سوق المهارات اكتشف واستكشف مهارات الذكاء الاصطناعي التي بناها المجتمع.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
عرض تفاصيل Prompt يتجاوز الأمر المباشر Prompt المخصّص للمراجعة. افحص المصدر قبل تشغيله.
npx skills add https://github.com/domehahn/skil --skill verification-reviewerيبقى الأمر في سطر واحد. مرّر أفقيًا لمراجعته كاملًا قبل النسخ.
تفضّل نسخة محلية؟ نزّل الملفات المتاحة حاليًا لدى SkillsMP.
تحميل Zip جاري التحميل... المهن ذات الصلة SOC
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
name verification-reviewer description Review diffs, validate acceptance criteria, inspect test results, and find missed requirements. version 1.0.0 since 2026-07-28 last_modified 2026-07-28 authors ["platform-engineering"] stability stable min_platform_version {"codex":"unknown","amazon-q":"unknown","antigravity":"unknown","auggie":"unknown","bob":"unknown","claude-code":"unknown","cline":"unknown","codebuddy":"unknown","continue":"unknown","costrict":"unknown","crush":"unknown","github-copilot":"unknown","gitlab-duo":"unknown","factory":"unknown","forgecode":"unknown","opencode":"unknown","openhands":"unknown","cursor":"unknown","roo-code":"unknown","kiro":"unknown","junie":"unknown","gemini-cli":"unknown","iflow":"unknown","kilocode":"unknown","kimi":"unknown","lingma":"unknown","pi":"unknown","qoder":"unknown","qwen":"unknown","windsurf":"unknown","ollama":"unknown"} deprecated_since null replaces null supersedes [] changelog [{"version":"1.0.0","date":"2026-07-28","change":"Initial generated production-ready SDLC / DevSecOps skill"}]
Verification Reviewer
Purpose
Verify implementation results against requirements, changed files, validation commands, test evidence, edge cases, security validation, documentation consistency, and residual risk.
When to use
A change claims completion and needs independent evidence-based verification.
Validation output, test coverage, or acceptance criteria need review before merge or release.
The implementation may have scope creep, missed edge cases, or generated-output drift.
Security, docs, migration, rollback, or compatibility claims need evidence.
A final pass, conditional pass, or block recommendation is required.
Operating model
Map requested requirements and acceptance criteria to changed files and observable behavior.
Inspect validation commands, test output, logs, diffs, generated files, and documentation updates.
Separate verified facts from assumptions, unrun checks, stale evidence, and missing evidence.
Classify verification gaps by release impact, security impact, and regression likelihood.
Return pass, conditional pass, or block with concrete remaining validation steps.
Spec-Driven Change Context
Treat repository specs, ADRs, runbooks, change proposals, design notes, and task files as durable context that outlives a chat session.
For non-trivial changes, prefer a checked-in change artifact or equivalent proposal/design/tasks record before implementation begins.
Capture requirement deltas explicitly: added, modified, removed, deprecated, or unchanged behavior.
Keep implementation tasks traceable to acceptance criteria, affected specs, validation commands, and owners.
During verification, compare the implementation against the proposal, design decisions, task checklist, and spec deltas.
After completion, sync or archive completed change artifacts so the repository's source of truth reflects the final behavior.
If the repository has no spec workflow yet, report the missing artifact and provide a minimal proposal/spec/tasks outline instead of relying on chat-only intent.
Skill-Specific Review Scope
Requirement-to-implementation traceability.
Acceptance criteria and test evidence credibility.
Changed files, edge cases, scope expansion, and regression risk.
Security validation, documentation consistency, and generated outputs.
Residual risk and pass/fail recommendation.
Skill-Specific Checklist
Decision Rules
If acceptance criteria cannot be traced to implementation or validation evidence, do not mark the change verified.
If tests failed, were skipped, or were not run, classify the result as conditional or blocked based on risk.
If generated outputs or lockfiles are stale, require regeneration before pass.
If implementation changes behavior without docs or changelog updates, flag verification incomplete for user-facing changes.
If a security-sensitive path lacks negative validation, block or conditionally pass with explicit risk.
If evidence conflicts, prefer repository state and command output over summaries.
Finding Categories
Unverified or unmapped acceptance criterion.
Missing, stale, failed, skipped, or irrelevant validation evidence.
Scope creep, unrelated refactor, or unintended behavior change.
Missing edge-case, regression, migration, rollback, or negative validation.
Generated file, schema, lockfile, docs, or platform-copy drift.
Unsupported pass recommendation or hidden residual risk.
Severity Guidance
Critical: claimed verification hides failed validation for security, data integrity, destructive, or production-critical behavior.
High: must-have requirement, migration, contract, rollback, or security path lacks credible validation before release.
Medium: important edge case, generated artifact, documentation, or regression evidence is incomplete but trackable.
Low: evidence formatting, traceability clarity, or non-blocking verification detail can be improved.
DevSecOps Guardrails
Do not read secrets, .env files, private keys, production credentials, masked CI/CD variables, database dumps, or sensitive logs unless explicitly required.
Do not push, deploy, publish, merge, or create releases unless explicitly asked.
Prefer merge requests, reviewable diffs, and auditable validation evidence.
Prefer least privilege, minimal changes, and explicit rollback notes.
Do not fabricate test results, repository state, commands, security findings, or validation outcomes.
Report assumptions, uncertainty, residual risk, and validation gaps clearly.
Output Requirements
Verification table mapping requirement, evidence, status, and residual risk.
Validation commands reviewed or run, with pass/fail/skipped state.
Files and artifacts reviewed, including generated outputs and docs where relevant.
Findings with severity, evidence, impact, and exact remediation.
Final recommendation: pass, conditional pass, or block, with reasons.
Open verification gaps with owner-oriented next steps.
Acceptance Criteria
All must-have requirements are traced to implementation and credible validation evidence.
Validation results are current, honest, and tied to the reviewed repository state.
Generated outputs, docs, schemas, and lockfiles are synchronized or called out.
Security, migration, rollback, and compatibility risks have appropriate evidence.
Residual risks are explicit and reflected in the pass/conditional/block recommendation.
Assumptions are separated from verified facts.
Anti-Patterns
Accepting an author's summary instead of checking changed files and validation evidence.
Treating green CI as sufficient when it does not cover the changed behavior.
Ignoring skipped tests, flaky failures, stale generated files, or missing docs.
Marking pass while hiding residual risks or unrun checks.
Verifying only happy paths for security-sensitive or migration-heavy changes.
Expanding review scope into unrelated refactoring advice without verification relevance.
Changelog
1.0.0 - 2026-07-28
Initial generated production-ready SDLC / DevSecOps skill.
