verify

name	verify
description	Skeptically verify that an implementation actually works — exercise the feature, run validation tiers, check coverage, confirm new code is wired up. Delegates to the verifier agent.
allowed-tools	Read, Grep, Glob, Bash(git status), Bash(git diff*), Bash(git log*), Bash(uv run poe quick-check), Bash(uv run poe agent-check), Bash(uv run poe check), Bash(uv run poe full-check), Bash(uv run poe test), Bash(uv run poe test-coverage)

/verify — Skeptical implementation check

PURPOSE

Prove the implementation works with evidence — not assumptions. Catches "compiles but doesn't actually run" failures the test suite can miss.

CRITICAL

• Trust evidence, not claims — run every command, read every file, check every output. Never accept "should work" without proof.
• Exercise the feature first — before checking infrastructure, actually invoke the new MCP tool / API method / fixed code path
• Use LSP findReferences on new symbols — zero callers means it's not wired up, even if imported
• Generated files must be intact — if api/, models/, or client.py changed, both regenerate-client and generate-pydantic must have run

STANDARD PATH

1. Pick the validation tier

Tier	Cmd	When
1	uv run poe quick-check	During iterative development
2	uv run poe agent-check	Before committing
3	uv run poe check	Before opening PR
4	uv run poe full-check	Before requesting review

Use Tier 3 by default for verification. If the change is small and isolated, Tier 2 is enough.

2. Exercise the feature

• New MCP tool → invoke via test harness or MCP inspector
• New API method → make a test call (or via integration test)
• Bug fix → reproduce the original scenario; confirm it no longer fails
• Behavior change → demonstrate old vs new

3. Run the verifier agent

Delegate the systematic checklist to the verifier agent. It walks: code exists, code works (validation tier passes), code is complete (no TODO stubs), code is integrated (LSP findReferences on new public symbols), generated-files intact, coverage maintained, regression check.

4. Confirm

• Validation tier passes clean (no warnings)
• New public functions/classes have callers (or are intentionally part of a public API surface)
• Coverage on core ≥ 87%
• No tests skipped or deleted unintentionally

5. Report

## Verification Report
### Status: PASS | FAIL
### Verified
- [item]: [evidence: command output, file:line, test count]
### Failed
- [item]: [what's wrong, what to fix]
### Recommendations
- [improvements noticed]

EDGE CASES

• [Coverage decreased] — identify which file lost coverage and why; document if the loss is acceptable (e.g. removed dead code) or fix.
• [Tests passed but feature doesn't actually work] — the feature exercise step (§2) caught it; otherwise verification is incomplete.
• [Verification reveals a doc gap] — fix CLAUDE.md or relevant guide as part of the verification work, not later.

RELATED

• verifier agent — runs the full systematic checklist
• pr-preparer agent — checks process readiness (commit format, coverage threshold)
• code-reviewer agent — assesses code quality, not just whether it works