/verify-this
Verify a claim with fresh local evidence: restate it falsifiably, capture baseline and treatment, compare artifacts, and return VERIFIED, NOT VERIFIED, or INCONCLUSIVE.
Claude Code
$ npx -y skills add cursor/plugins --skill verify-this --agent claude-code
Codex
$ npx skills add cursor/plugins --skill verify-this -a codex -y
Cursor
$ npx skills add cursor/plugins --skill verify-this -a cursor -y
Gemini CLI
$ npx skills add cursor/plugins --skill verify-this -a gemini-cli -y
GitHub Copilot
$ npx skills add cursor/plugins --skill verify-this -a github-copilot -y
OpenCode
$ npx skills add cursor/plugins --skill verify-this -a opencode -y
Windsurf
$ npx skills add cursor/plugins --skill verify-this -a windsurf -y
SKILL.md
verify-this.SKILL.mdname: verify-this
description: "Verify a claim with fresh local evidence: restate it falsifiably, capture baseline and treatment, compare artifacts, and return VERIFIED, NOT VERIFIED, or INCONCLUSIVE."
Verify This
Verification is not a recap. It proves or disproves a specific claim with repeatable evidence.
When To Use
- The user asks "verify this", "prove it works", "did this fix it", or "show me the evidence".
- A bug fix needs a before/after repro.
- A UI, CLI, API, performance, or memory claim needs measurement.
- A test passes but the user-visible behavior still needs confirmation.
Do not use this for vague claims like "the code is cleaner". Ask for a measurable claim first.
Workflow
1. Restate the claim in falsifiable form: condition, metric, and threshold. 2. Pick the smallest local surface that can disprove it. 3. Capture a baseline from the old state: merge base, parent commit, failing branch, or current broken repro. 4. Capture treatment from the changed state with the same command, data, warmup, and environment. 5. Compare raw artifacts: numbers, screenshots, terminal transcripts, HTTP responses, profiles, heap snapshots, or test output. 6. Return exactly one verdict: `VERIFIED`, `NOT VERIFIED`, or `INCONCLUSIVE`.
Local Surfaces
- Code behavior: focused unit/integration tests or a minimal repro script.
- CLI/TUI behavior: `control-cli`, terminal transcript, or demo recording.
- UI behavior: `control-ui`, screenshots, accessibility snapshots, or browser traces.
- API behavior: local HTTP/RPC request and response diff.
- Performance: same-machine baseline/treatment timings or CPU profiles.
- Memory: heap snapshots before and after the suspected operation.
Artifact Layout
When safe to write artifacts:
/tmp/verify-this/<claim-slug>/
├── claim.md
├── timeline.md
├── baseline/
├── treatment/
├── diff/
└── verdict.md
If artifacts may contain sensitive code, prompts, screenshots, HTTP bodies, or heap data, keep only the minimal inline evidence unless the user agrees to disk storage.
Verdict Rules
- `VERIFIED`: baseline and treatment differ in the predicted direction, by the claimed threshold, with no obvious confound.
- `NOT VERIFIED`: the behavior is unchanged, moves the wrong way, or misses the threshold.
- `INCONCLUSIVE`: no valid baseline, noisy signal, failed measurement, or an environment difference invalidates the comparison.
Output
Use this shape:
VERIFIED | NOT VERIFIED | INCONCLUSIVE
Claim: <falsifiable claim>
Evidence:
<metric/artifact>: baseline=<...>, treatment=<...>, delta=<...>, threshold=<...>
Reasoning:
<one tight paragraph naming the evidence and any confounds>
Do not soften a negative result. A clear `NOT VERIFIED` is useful.
Read more
name: verify-this description: "Verify a claim with fresh local evidence: restate it falsifiably, capture baseline and treatment, compare artifacts, and return VERIFIED, NOT VERIFIED, or INCONCLUSIVE."
Verify This
Verification is not a recap. It proves or disproves a specific claim with repeatable evidence.
When To Use
- The user asks "verify this", "prove it works", "did this fix it", or "show me the evidence".
- A bug fix needs a before/after repro.
- A UI, CLI, API, performance, or memory claim needs measurement.
- A test passes but the user-visible behavior still needs confirmation.
Do not use this for vague claims like "the code is cleaner". Ask for a measurable claim first.
Workflow
1. Restate the claim in falsifiable form: condition, metric, and threshold. 2. Pick the smallest local surface that can disprove it. 3. Capture a baseline from the old state: merge base, parent commit, failing branch, or current broken repro. 4. Capture treatment from the changed state with the same command, data, warmup, and environment. 5. Compare raw artifacts: numbers, screenshots, terminal transcripts, HTTP responses, profiles, heap snapshots, or test output. 6. Return exactly one verdict: `VERIFIED`, `NOT VERIFIED`, or `INCONCLUSIVE`.
Local Surfaces
- Code behavior: focused unit/integration tests or a minimal repro script.
- CLI/TUI behavior: `control-cli`, terminal transcript, or demo recording.
- UI behavior: `control-ui`, screenshots, accessibility snapshots, or browser traces.
- API behavior: local HTTP/RPC request and response diff.
- Performance: same-machine baseline/treatment timings or CPU profiles.
- Memory: heap snapshots before and after the suspected operation.
Artifact Layout
When safe to write artifacts:
/tmp/verify-this/<claim-slug>/ ├── claim.md ├── timeline.md ├── baseline/ ├── treatment/ ├── diff/ └── verdict.md
If artifacts may contain sensitive code, prompts, screenshots, HTTP bodies, or heap data, keep only the minimal inline evidence unless the user agrees to disk storage.
Verdict Rules
- `VERIFIED`: baseline and treatment differ in the predicted direction, by the claimed threshold, with no obvious confound.
- `NOT VERIFIED`: the behavior is unchanged, moves the wrong way, or misses the threshold.
- `INCONCLUSIVE`: no valid baseline, noisy signal, failed measurement, or an environment difference invalidates the comparison.
Output
Use this shape:
VERIFIED | NOT VERIFIED | INCONCLUSIVE Claim: <falsifiable claim> Evidence: <metric/artifact>: baseline=<...>, treatment=<...>, delta=<...>, threshold=<...> Reasoning: <one tight paragraph naming the evidence and any confounds>
Do not soften a negative result. A clear `NOT VERIFIED` is useful.
Official Cursor plugins for popular developer tools, frameworks, and SaaS products. Each plugin is a standalone directory at the repository root with its own .cursor-plugin/plugin.json manifest.
More skills from other plugins.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, modifying behavior, or…
ask-matt
Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the skills in this repo.
Questions about verify-this.
- Which coding agents can use verify-this?
- verify-this installs in Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot, OpenCode and Windsurf with the skills CLI, using each agent's flag shown on this page. Flowy's auto-invocation, which fires a skill when your prompt matches, runs in Claude Code only.

