verification-before-completion

donellmccoy's avatarfrom donellmccoy

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

0stars🔀0forks📁View on GitHub🕐Updated Jan 11, 2026

When & Why to Use This Skill

The 'Verification Before Completion' skill is a rigorous quality assurance framework designed to eliminate false success claims in software development. It enforces a 'gate function' that requires AI agents to provide fresh, empirical evidence—such as test logs, build exit codes, and linter outputs—before marking any task as complete, fixed, or ready for a Pull Request. By prioritizing evidence over assertions, it ensures high-reliability code delivery and maintains trust in automated workflows.

Use Cases

  • Pre-PR Validation: Ensuring all unit tests and integration tests pass with zero failures before a developer or agent attempts to create a Pull Request.
  • Regression Testing: Implementing a strict red-green-refactor cycle where a failure is first observed and then verified as resolved through repeated command execution.
  • Build Integrity Checks: Verifying that complex builds (e.g., .NET/C# solutions) succeed with zero warnings and correct exit codes rather than relying on partial successes.
  • Reliability Guardrails: Preventing the use of non-committal language like 'should work' or 'seems fixed' by mandating a 'run-and-read' protocol for every code change.
  • Database Migration Safety: Confirming that EF Core or SQL migrations are valid by running them against both in-memory and integration environments before deployment.
nameverification-before-completion
descriptionUse 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

Verification Before Completion

Overview

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.

The Iron Law

NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE

If you haven't run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.

The Gate Function

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

Common Failures

Claim Requires Not Sufficient
Tests pass Test command output: 0 failures Previous run, "should pass"
Linter clean Linter output: 0 errors Partial check, extrapolation
Build succeeds Build command: exit 0 Linter passing, logs look good
Bug fixed Test original symptom: passes Code changed, assumed fixed
Regression test works Red-green cycle verified Test passes once
Agent completed VCS diff shows changes Agent reports "success"
Requirements met Line-by-line checklist Tests passing

C# .NET Specific (ECTSystem):

Claim Requires C# Verification Not Sufficient
Build succeeds dotnet build ElectronicCaseTracking.sln exit 0, 0 warnings Restore succeeded, IntelliSense green
Tests pass dotnet test AF.ECT.Tests --no-build shows: X passed, 0 failed Individual test passed once
gRPC service works Test includes RpcException with correct StatusCode Code compiles, proto file exists
EF Core query works InMemoryDatabase test passes + SQL Server test passes Compiles, LINQ looks right
No warnings dotnet build /p:TreatWarningsAsErrors=true succeeds CS warnings list is empty
Migration valid dotnet ef migrations list + InMemoryDatabase test Migration file created

Red Flags - STOP

  • Using "should", "probably", "seems to"
  • Expressing satisfaction before verification ("Great!", "Perfect!", "Done!", etc.)
  • About to commit/push/PR without verification
  • Trusting agent success reports
  • Relying on partial verification
  • Thinking "just this once"
  • Tired and wanting work over
  • ANY wording implying success without having run verification

Rationalization Prevention

Excuse Reality
"Should work now" RUN the verification
"I'm confident" Confidence ≠ evidence
"Just this once" No exceptions
"Linter passed" Linter ≠ compiler
"Agent said success" Verify independently
"I'm tired" Exhaustion ≠ excuse
"Partial check is enough" Partial proves nothing
"Different words so rule doesn't apply" Spirit over letter

Key Patterns

Tests:

✅ [Run dotnet test] [See: X passed] "All tests pass"
$ dotnet test --no-build --logger "console;verbosity=minimal"
  34 test(s) passed
❌ "Linter passed" (linter ≠ tests)

Regression tests (TDD Red-Green):

✅ Write test → Run (FAIL) → Fix code → Run (PASS) → Revert fix → Run (FAIL) → Restore → Run (PASS)
$ dotnet test AF.ECT.Tests --filter "MethodName" --no-build
  FAIL: MethodName
[Fix code]
$ dotnet test AF.ECT.Tests --filter "MethodName" --no-build
  1 passed
❌ "I've written a test" (without watching it fail then pass)

Build:

✅ [Run build] [See: exit 0] "Build passes"
$ dotnet build ElectronicCaseTracking.sln --no-restore
Building solution configuration 'Release|Any CPU'.
  All projects are up to date for restoration.
  All projects are up to date for generation.
  All projects are up to date for compilation.

❌ "Restore passed" (restore ≠ build)

C# .NET Specific (ECTSystem):

gRPC service verification:

✅ Test written for both success AND exception paths
[Fact]
public async Task GetWorkflow_WithValidId_ReturnsWorkflow() { ... }  ✓ PASS

[Fact]
public async Task GetWorkflow_WithNullId_ThrowsRpcException() { ... }  ✓ PASS

❌ "Only tested success path" (missing exception test)

EF Core verification:

✅ Test uses InMemoryDatabase AND actual SQL Server connection tested
// Test with InMemory
var options = new DbContextOptionsBuilder<EctDbContext>()
    .UseInMemoryDatabase("test")
    .Options;
using var context = new EctDbContext(options);
// Verify query logic works

// Integration test with actual SQL Server connection
dotnet test AF.ECT.Tests/Integration --filter "GetWorkflow_Integration" --no-build

❌ "InMemory test passes" (without integration test)

Build warning verification:

✅ dotnet build ElectronicCaseTracking.sln /p:TreatWarningsAsErrors=true
Build succeeded. 0 errors, 0 warnings

❌ "Build succeeded" (with CS warnings present)

Why This Matters

From 24 failure memories:

  • your human partner said "I don't believe you" - trust broken
  • Undefined functions shipped - would crash
  • Missing requirements shipped - incomplete features
  • Time wasted on false completion → redirect → rework
  • Violates: "Honesty is a core value. If you lie, you'll be replaced."

When To Apply

ALWAYS before:

  • ANY variation of success/completion claims
  • ANY expression of satisfaction
  • ANY positive statement about work state
  • Committing, PR creation, task completion
  • Moving to next task
  • Delegating to agents

Rule applies to:

  • Exact phrases
  • Paraphrases and synonyms
  • Implications of success
  • ANY communication suggesting completion/correctness

The Bottom Line

No shortcuts for verification.

Run the command. Read the output. THEN claim the result.

This is non-negotiable.