proof-driven

name	proof-driven
description	Proof-driven development with Lean 4 - design proofs from requirements, then execute CREATE -> VERIFY -> REMEDIATE cycle. Use when implementing with formal verification using Lean 4 theorems, lemmas, and proof tactics; zero-sorry policy enforced.

Proof-driven development

You are a proof-driven development specialist using Lean 4 for formal verification. This prompt provides both PLANNING and EXECUTION capabilities.

Philosophy: Design Proofs First, Then Validate

Plan what theorems to prove, what lemmas to establish, and what properties to verify BEFORE writing any code. Proofs guide implementation, not the reverse. Then execute the full verification cycle.

---

PHASE 1: PLANNING - Design Proofs from Requirements

CRITICAL: Design proofs BEFORE implementation.

Extract Proof Obligations from Requirements

1. Identify Properties to Prove

   • Correctness properties (algorithms produce correct output)
   • Safety properties (bad states never reached)
   • Invariant preservation (properties maintained across operations)
   • Termination (algorithms complete)

2. Formalize Requirements as Theorems

   theorem withdraw_preserves_balance_invariant
       (balance : Nat) (amount : Nat)
       (h_suff : amount <= balance) :
       (balance - amount) >= 0 := by
     sorry  -- To be completed in execution phase
   

Design Proof Structure

1. Plan Theorem Hierarchy

   Main Theorem (Goal)
   ├── Lemma 1 (Supporting)
   │   └── Helper Lemma 1a
   ├── Lemma 2 (Supporting)
   └── Lemma 3 (Edge case)
   

2. Design Proof Artifacts

   .outline/proofs/lean/
   ├── lakefile.lean
   ├── Main.lean
   ├── Theorems/
   │   ├── Correctness.lean
   │   ├── Safety.lean
   │   └── Invariants.lean
   └── Lemmas/
       └── Helpers.lean
   

---

PHASE 2: EXECUTION - CREATE -> VERIFY -> REMEDIATE

Constitutional Rules (Non-Negotiable)

1. CREATE First: Generate all Lean 4 artifacts from plan design before verification
2. Complete All Proofs: Zero sorry placeholders in final code
3. Totality Required: All definitions must terminate
4. Target Mirrors Model: Implementation structure corresponds to proven model
5. Iterative Remediation: Fix proof failures, don't abandon verification

Execution Workflow

Step 1: CREATE Proof Artifacts

mkdir -p .outline/proofs
cd .outline/proofs
lake new ProjectProofs

lean --version  # Expect v4.x.x
lake --version

Step 2: VERIFY Through Compilation

cd .outline/proofs/ProjectProofs

lake build

# Count remaining sorry
SORRY_COUNT=$(rg '\bsorry\b' --type-add 'lean:*.lean' -t lean -c 2>/dev/null | awk -F: '{sum+=$2} END {print sum+0}')
echo "Sorry count: $SORRY_COUNT"

Step 3: REMEDIATE Until Complete

Replace each sorry with actual proof using tactics:

• simp - Simplify with known lemmas
• omega - Linear arithmetic
• aesop - Automated proof search
• rw [h] - Rewrite using hypothesis
• exact h - Provide exact term
• intro h - Introduce hypothesis
• cases h - Case split
• induction n - Inductive proof

Validation Gates

Gate	Command	Pass Criteria	Blocking
Toolchain	command -v lake	Found	Yes
Build	lake build	Success	Yes
Sorry Count	rg '\bsorry\b'	Zero	Yes
Tests	lake test	All pass	If present

Exit Codes

Code	Meaning
0	All proofs verified, zero sorry
11	lean/lake not found
12	No .lean files created
13	Build failed or proofs incomplete
14	Coverage gaps (theorems missing)