菜单
Use before claiming completion, fixes, passes, commits, or PR creation. Requires running verification commands and reading their output before making success claims. Evidence always comes before claims.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Update the per-session intent ledger for every user input and provide current intent as semantic context consumed by gates, skill-evolution, and jailbreak-detector. Keep intent summaries without storing raw prompts.
Use when the user asks about skill upgrades, update recommendations, or an evolution backlog; analyze io-trace and conduct_feedback to produce report-only evolution candidates. No automatic edits.
Use when an implementation plan already exists. Execute it in a separate session with review checkpoints.
Use when implementing a known feature, bug fix, or refactor with a resolved behavior contract. Requires a failing test before production code; use discovery first when the target or premise is unknown.
Use at the start of every coding or development conversation. Defines how to find and invoke coding-convention family skills. Requires relevant skills before any response, including clarification questions.
Runs after session-intent-analyzer and jailbreak-detector/downstream gate as their consumer. Decomposes the request and routes output, verification, lifecycle, and boundary skills without owning intake, raw intent inference, or tool permission.
| name | verification-before-completion |
| description | Use before claiming completion, fixes, passes, commits, or PR creation. Requires running verification commands and reading their output before making success claims. Evidence always comes before claims. |
| compatibility | ["Python 3.11+ standard library"] |
Completion without fresh evidence is not efficiency. It is a lie.
Core principles:
Do not claim completion without fresh verification evidence from this turn.
If the verification command or inspection did not run in this message, do not claim that it passed.
No acceptance-criteria means no completed verification-before-completion.
Before any claim that executed work is complete, fixed, successful, or freshly verified, extract verifiable criteria from the user intent, locked decisions, and boundary-contract. Put those criteria in acceptance-criteria, then connect each intended closure claim to a criterion and fresh evidence in claim-evidence-map.
Evidence such as link checks, lint, diff checks, or passing tests proves completion only when it directly satisfies the criterion. If the central criterion is not directly verified, leave it in unverified and report partial status in prose.
A verdict you relay or endorse is your own claim. Agreeing with, confirming, or
passing through a third party's finding -- a reviewer, a prior agent, another
turn, a memory -- puts it in the claim-evidence-map as YOUR claim with YOUR
fresh evidence; inheriting the source's verdict is not evidence. This holds for
every item, including LOW-severity ones -- severity does not lower the bar.
An absence claim -- "no test exists", "X is not enforced", "nothing handles
this" -- is never proven by reasoning or by the source's say-so. It needs a
fresh grep/read this turn that would surface the thing if present; cite that
search as the evidence.
A verdict stated only in prose, outside the claim-evidence-map, escapes this
gate. If you assert it, map it.
Hard sequence: skill load/call -> fresh verification -> [completion-check]
Before any executed-work completion, fix, success, or fresh-verification claim, perform the steps below in this exact order:
verification-before-completion for the current turn. On
Claude Code, this means the visible Skill call. On Codex, this means reading
this current SKILL.md and following its workflow.[completion-check] with skill-call: verification-before-completion (this turn).If any step is missing or out of order, the completion-check is invalid.
Before claiming any state as satisfied:
acceptance-criteria from the user intent and contract.unverified.Skipping any step is not verification. It is a lie.
Use this block immediately before the final summary when you are making an executed-work completion, fix, success, or fresh-verification claim.
[completion-check]
- verification-before-completion: done
- skill-call: verification-before-completion (this turn)
- acceptance-criteria:
- <criterion-id>: <user-intent-or-contract-condition> [source: user-explicit | inferred | previous-tool | system-doc]
- claim-evidence-map:
- claim: <completion-or-recommendation-claim>
criterion: <criterion-id>
evidence: <fresh command, inspected file, source locator, or tool output>
verdict: pass | fail
- unverified:
- none
- evidence: <fresh command or inspected file>
Only emit a finalized [completion-check] when every listed criterion has a pass or fail verdict and unverified is none. If anything remains unverified, do not emit the final block. Report the partial state in prose and name the missing check.
| Claim | Required evidence | Insufficient evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Tests passed | Fresh test command output with zero failures | A previous run or a prediction |
| Lint is clean | Fresh lint output with zero errors | Partial lint or an extrapolation |
| Build succeeded | Build command exit code 0 | Lint passing |
| Bug fixed | A test or reproduction that covers the original symptom | Changed code plus confidence |
| Regression test works | Red-green evidence when TDD requires it | A test that passed once |
| Agent completed the work | VCS diff plus independent verification | The agent's success report |
| Requirements satisfied | Claim-evidence map for each acceptance criterion | Tests pass alone, links pass alone, or diff exists alone |
| Relayed/endorsed review verdict | Your own fresh grep/read for that item, mapped in claim-evidence-map | The reviewer's verdict, or your agreement with it, alone |
| Absence claim ("no test/code exists", "not enforced") | A fresh grep/read this turn that would surface it if present | Reasoning, prior context, or the source's say-so |
Stop before claiming success when any of these appear:
| Excuse | Required response |
|---|---|
| "It should work now." | Run verification. |
| "I am confident." | Confidence is not evidence. |
| "Just this once." | No exception. |
| "Lint passed." | Lint is not a compiler or a requirement map. |
| "Another agent said it succeeded." | Verify independently. |
| "Partial checks are enough." | Partial checks prove only the checked criteria. |
| "The wording is different, so the rule does not apply." | Completion implications still count. |
Tests:
Run the test command, read the result, then claim only the observed result.
Regression tests:
Write the test -> run and observe pass -> revert or disable the fix -> observe fail -> restore fix -> observe pass.
Builds:
Run the build command and read exit code 0 before claiming build success.
Requirements:
Re-read the user intent and contract -> write acceptance criteria -> verify each criterion -> report missing criteria or verified completion.
Agent delegation:
Read the agent report -> inspect the actual diff or artifact -> run the relevant check -> report actual state.
From accumulated failure memory:
Layer marker: web-search-first.
If the final claim includes factual behavior about an external tool, library, CLI, SDK, framework, version, or platform behavior, apply the web-search evidence gate before the claim.
Categories:
Minimum query pattern for Category B or C:
<tool> <year> github issue<tool> reddit<tool> not working <version>Evidence block extension:
- web-search-evidence:
- query: <query 1>
accessible_url: <url>
finding: <key finding or value>
source-locator:
source_type: web
region: n/a
- query: <query 2>
accessible_url: <url>
finding: <key finding or value>
source-locator:
source_type: web
region: n/a
- query: <query 3>
accessible_url: <url>
finding: <key finding or value>
source-locator:
source_type: web
region: n/a
Source-locator contract:
accessible_url.file_path, page, and region.region values are top, middle, bottom, or n/a. Literal enum form: top | middle | bottom | n/a.page: n/a plus an equivalent locator such as section, row, slide, or sheet in locator_note.When Category B or C appears and web-search-evidence has fewer than three entries, lacks accessible_url, or lacks source-locator, the completion claim is invalid. Search again, fill the evidence, then claim only what the evidence supports.
This gate exists because official docs describe intended behavior, while community reports often reveal runtime regressions, race conditions, and version-dependent failures.
The only exception is an explicit user instruction for this session to waive web-search evidence.
Before claiming verification-complexity-level-3 completion, external agent governance absorption, or RAG/evaluator candidate promotion, read docs/policies/evaluator-artifact-contract.md.
The completion evidence must include an accepted verifier-result.json.
Apply this skill immediately before:
The rule covers exact words, paraphrases, implications, and tone that suggests the work is complete.
Before finalizing, ask:
There is no shortcut. Run the check, read the output, map the claim, then speak.