Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs. Requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims. Evidence before assertions, always.
From casaflownpx claudepluginhub casaperks/casaflow --plugin casaflowThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
Designs and optimizes AI agent action spaces, tool definitions, observation formats, error recovery, and context for higher task completion rates.
Enables AI agents to execute x402 payments with per-task budgets, spending controls, and non-custodial wallets via MCP tools. Use when agents pay for APIs, services, or other agents.
Compares coding agents like Claude Code and Aider on custom YAML-defined codebase tasks using git worktrees, measuring pass rate, cost, time, and consistency.
PURPOSE: Prevent false completion claims by enforcing fresh verification evidence before any assertion of success. Claiming work is complete without verification is dishonesty, not efficiency.
Core principle: Evidence before claims, always.
Violating the letter of this rule is violating the spirit of this rule.
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE
If you have not run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.
ALWAYS before:
Rule applies to:
BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:
1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?
2. RUN: Execute the FULL command (fresh, complete)
3. READ: Full output, check exit code, count failures
4. VERIFY: Does output confirm the claim?
- If NO: State actual status with evidence
- If YES: State claim WITH evidence
5. ONLY THEN: Make the claim
Skip any step = lying, not verifying
IDENTIFY -- What would prove the claim you are about to make? A test command, a build command, a lint command, a curl request. Name the exact command.
RUN -- Execute the full command. Not a subset. Not a cached result. Not "I ran it earlier." Fresh execution, right now, in this message.
READ -- Read the full output. Check the exit code. Count the failures, errors, and warnings. Do not skim. Do not assume.
VERIFY -- Does the output actually confirm what you are about to claim? A passing lint check does not confirm a passing build. A passing build does not confirm passing tests. Match the evidence to the specific claim.
CLAIM -- Now, and only now, make the claim. Include the evidence: "All 47 tests pass (output above)." Not just "tests pass."
| Claim | Requires | Not Sufficient |
|---|---|---|
| "Tests pass" | Test command output showing 0 failures | Previous run, "should pass", partial run |
| "Linter clean" | Linter output showing 0 errors | Partial check, extrapolation from subset |
| "Build succeeds" | Build command with exit 0 | Linter passing, "logs look good" |
| "Bug fixed" | Test of original symptom passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |
| "Regression test works" | Red-green cycle verified | Test passes once (never saw it fail) |
| "Agent completed task" | VCS diff shows correct changes | Agent reports "success" |
| "Requirements met" | Line-by-line checklist against spec | Tests passing (tests may not cover all requirements) |
| "No regressions" | Full test suite passes | Only new tests run |
| "Works in production" | Production verification (health check, smoke test) | Works locally |
If you catch yourself doing any of these, STOP and run the gate function:
| Excuse | Reality |
|---|---|
| "Should work now" | RUN the verification |
| "I'm confident" | Confidence is not evidence |
| "Just this once" | No exceptions |
| "Linter passed" | Linter is not the compiler. Linter is not the test suite. |
| "Agent said success" | Verify independently |
| "I'm tired" | Exhaustion is not an excuse |
| "Partial check is enough" | Partial proves nothing about the whole |
| "Different words so rule doesn't apply" | Spirit over letter |
| "I ran it a few messages ago" | Stale evidence. Run it again. |
| "The change is trivial" | Trivial changes break things too |
CORRECT: [Run test command] -> [See: 47/47 pass] -> "All 47 tests pass"
WRONG: "Should pass now" / "Looks correct" / "Tests were passing earlier"
CORRECT: Write test -> Run (PASS) -> Revert fix -> Run (MUST FAIL) -> Restore -> Run (PASS)
WRONG: "I've written a regression test" (without red-green verification)
CORRECT: [Run build] -> [See: exit 0, no errors] -> "Build succeeds"
WRONG: "Linter passed" (linter does not check compilation)
CORRECT: Re-read spec -> Create checklist -> Verify each item -> Report gaps or completion
WRONG: "Tests pass, task complete" (tests may not cover all requirements)
CORRECT: Agent reports success -> Check VCS diff -> Verify changes are correct -> Report actual state
WRONG: Trust agent report at face value
For claims that span multiple dimensions (e.g., "ready to merge"):
CORRECT:
1. Tests pass (run test suite, show output)
2. Build succeeds (run build, show exit code)
3. Linter clean (run linter, show output)
4. Requirements met (checklist against spec)
-> "Ready to merge: tests pass (47/47), build clean, lint clean, all 6 requirements verified"
WRONG:
"Everything looks good, ready to merge"
False completion claims cause:
The cost of running a verification command is seconds. The cost of a false claim is hours of rework and damaged trust.
Called by:
debug -- before claiming a fix works (Phase 4, Step 3)sdd -- before marking a task completeteam-dev -- before marking a task completefinish -- before presenting completion optionsRelated skills:
tdd -- TDD's verify-red and verify-green steps are verification instancesdebug -- Phase 4 requires verification before claiming fix successNo shortcuts for verification.
Run the command. Read the output. THEN claim the result.
This is non-negotiable.