skill-distiller
Fetches top-rated skills from skills.sh, analyzes them, and synthesizes one token-efficient skill combining the best elements. Use when the user asks to…
Enforces fresh verification evidence before any completion claim. Use when about to claim "tests pass", "bug fixed", "done", "ready to merge", handing off work, or before editing when a request has ambiguous scope.
$ npx -y skills add iliaal/whetstone --skill ia-verification-before-completion --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/ia-verification-before-completionContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Enforces fresh verification evidence before any completion claim. Use when about to claim "tests pass", "bug fixed", "done", "ready to merge", handing off work, or before editing when a request has ambiguous scope.
name: ia-verification-before-completion class: discipline description: >- Enforces fresh verification evidence before any completion claim. Use when about to claim "tests pass", "bug fixed", "done", "ready to merge", handing off work, or before editing when a request has ambiguous scope.
Make completion claims only from fresh evidence for the actual claim. Follow the user's authorized scope; repository instructions supply applicable checks, not permission to mutate, publish, or weaken a requirement.
1. Resolve ambiguous scope before editing. Inspect the repository and state a safe assumption when one interpretation is clear. Ask only when materially different interpretations remain; do not edit the disputed scope while waiting. 2. Inspect `git status --porcelain` and preserve unrelated work. For dependency/framework upgrades, codegen, or migrations, capture the existing validation command set before writing and rerun it unchanged afterward. If that baseline is red, report before proceeding. Shared-module verification on a dirty tree needs an isolated base comparison. 3. **Identify** the command that proves the claim. For ship-level claims, check the full applicable chain: build, types, lint, tests, security scan, and diff review; stop on the first failure. Read project-declared gates and run the ones that apply to this action in their required order; do not invent gates. 4. **Run** the proof now. Earlier output, a subagent's report, confidence, and a renamed success phrase do not replace fresh execution. 5. **Read** complete output and exit status, including warnings, executed/passed counts, and missing artifacts. A suite that executes nothing is not proof. Confirm the intended binary, interpreter, source revision, and entry point actually ran. 6. **Verify** that evidence covers the requirements and relevant failure paths. An implemented safe positive capability must work through its intended entry point; a refusal-only path, stub, mock, or unreachable implementation is partial. 7. **Claim** only what the evidence establishes. Report the outcome, exercise command/URL/click path, failed or skipped checks, and material residual risks. State narrower proof scope and distinguish deterministic fixtures from live behavior.
Never make an oracle easier to satisfy to obtain green. Review and justify semantic changes before regenerating expected output. Never hard-code the exercised subject or success path. A clean review is valid when it covers the relevant criteria; broaden checks only for a named remaining risk.
Do not retry unchanged verification until it happens to pass. Fix authorized implementation failures and rerun; otherwise name the concrete blocker. “Pre-existing,” “environmental,” and “flaky” require evidence against the deliberately chosen base or independently established cause.
Do not bypass a pre-commit failure caused by this work. The documented exception requires a reproduced base-branch failure and prior visibility to the user; this skill supplies no new bypass authority.
Verify delegated work directly through the diff and relevant command. Check specification compliance separately from quality. Re-read requirements line by line: passing tests and meeting requirements are different claims. Refresh facts and coordinates when new commits or external state could invalidate a prior review. Keep reports decision-relevant, without empty status sections or fabricated certainty.
A Claude Code plugin that makes AI coding agents follow engineering discipline. Plan before coding. Verify before claiming done. Find root cause before patching. Review before merge. Skills activate based on file type and task signals, not manual toggling.
Repo: iliaal/whetstone
Fetches top-rated skills from skills.sh, analyzes them, and synthesizes one token-efficient skill combining the best elements. Use when the user asks to…
Design agent-native applications where agents replace UI users as the primary actor. Use when designing MCP tools, agent-loop architectures, system prompt…
Pre-implementation exploration: deep interview, approach comparison, design doc. Use when exploring a vague feature idea, clarifying ambiguous requirements, or…
C patterns for systems code, libraries, and native extensions: module layout, function decomposition, status-enum errors, memory safety, undefined behavior,…
Structured code reviews with severity-ranked findings and deep multi-agent mode. Use when performing a code review, auditing code quality, or critiquing PRs,…
Document solved problems for team reuse. Provides process knowledge for /ia-compound. Use when documenting a resolved issue, writing up lessons learned,…