/gaia-check

name: gaia-check
description: Use when the user asks to check, certify or live-test an area of Gaia in the running host -- "probemos las aprobaciones", "gaia-check", "ejecuta la prueba N", "corre el catálogo de firmas" -- in Claude Code or OpenCode

Gaia Check

A guided live certification of Gaia, one area at a time, in the host the user is running. You, the orchestrator, give ordinary small tasks to specialists that do not know they are being checked, you guide the user through each answer and what to expect, and you check the result yourself with the CLI. The first area is approvals; another area is added as its own section here, without renaming the skill.

The specialists are blind for a reason: a specialist told "this is a test" behaves like one -- it asks for signatures it would not ask for, or skips the ones it would. Only an ordinary task shows what Gaia does when an agent simply works. So a dispatch never says test, check, signature or approval; it says what to change, where.

Nothing is invented around it: no sandbox, no repository, no fixture, no preparation beyond what a check names. Everything happens in one fixed folder, `<scratch>/prueba-firmas/`, where `<scratch>` is the `scratch=` line of `gaia paths`. Gaia's scratch retention never removes that folder: it only reclaims entries named by a closed contract id, and `prueba-firmas` is not one.

Running a check

1. Pick the run's prefix, `<host>-<HHMM>-` (`cc-` Claude Code, `oc-` OpenCode), and name every file of the run with it. Two hosts can then run at the same time in the same folder without touching each other's files. 2. Say which checks run, in what combination, what the user will be asked and the answer to give ("in check 2 choose Reject"). 3. Dispatch one `developer` per file with an ordinary task: create the file with the content you name, then make the change the check describes, with the absolute path. Several specialists may run at once; each owns its files. 4. A specialist whose command needs consent returns `APPROVAL_REQUEST`. Present it with `orchestrator-present-approval`, unchanged, reminding the user of the expected answer right before the question opens. 5. Check with `gaia approvals show <approval_id>` and with the folder listing. State and Outcome are separate lines: State is the user's decision (`pending`, `orphaned`, `approved`, `rejected`); Outcome is what became of an approved request -- `executed` once it ran, `unused` while its window is open, no line when the window closes with nothing matched. A check passes only when both lines and the files match; report which part did not. 6. Clean everything. Withdraw a still-pending signature with `gaia approvals reject <approval_id>`, then give a specialist one last ordinary task: `rm` of each exact path left with the run's prefix, which inside scratch needs no signature. The folder and `otra/` stay, with no file of the run; check the listing before you finish.

Area: approvals

The checks below are the minimum a certification covers. Combine them in a run -- several at once, two signatures of different checks in one question -- rather than always running them one by one in this order. Each change is a `mv` of the check's own file; `<p>` is the run's prefix.

**Check 1 -- Approve.** File `<p>nota-1.txt`. Task: rename it to `<p>nota-1-ok.txt`. User: Approve. Expected: State `approved`, Outcome `executed`; only `<p>nota-1-ok.txt` exists.

**Check 2 -- Reject.** File `<p>nota-2.txt`. Task: rename it to `<p>nota-2-ok.txt`. User: Reject. Expected: State `rejected`, no Outcome line; `<p>nota-2.txt` unchanged. Resumed, the specialist runs the identical command once and it is blocked again under a new id -- the rejected signature is not reusable; withdraw that new one.

**Check 3 -- Details, then Approve.** File `<p>nota-3.txt`. Task: rename it to `<p>nota-3-ok.txt`. User: Details first. Expected: the Details question shows the command, what it does, its impact and the rollback; State is still `pending`, the file unchanged. Ask again with `gaia approvals question <approval_id>` (Details itself is `gaia approvals question --details`); user: Approve. Expected: State `approved`, Outcome `executed`.

**Check 4 -- Two commands, one signature.** File `<p>nota-4.txt`. Task: rename it to `<p>nota-4-a.txt` and then to `<p>nota-4-b.txt`. User: Approve on both questions. Expected: one signature; State `approved`, Outcome `executed`; only `<p>nota-4-b.txt` exists.

**Check 5 -- Reject one question of a set.** File `<p>nota-5.txt`. Task: as check 4. User: Approve on `Firma 1/2`, Reject on `Firma 2/2`. Expected: the whole signature is rejected -- State `rejected`, no Outcome line; nothing ran, `<p>nota-5.txt` unchanged.

**Check 6 -- Another folder.** File `otra/<p>nota-6.txt`. Task: inside `<folder>/otra`, rename it to `<p>nota-6-ok.txt` using relative names. User: Details, then Approve. Expected: Details ends with `[ CWD: <folder>/otra ]`; it runs as `cd <folder>/otra && <command>`, sealed with `--cwd`; State `approved`, Outcome `executed`.

**Check 7 -- Several signatures in one question.** Two specialists, files `<p>nota-7a.txt` and `<p>nota-7b.txt`, each renames its file to `-ok`. Ask both in one `gaia approvals question <id-7a> <id-7b>`. User: Approve 7a, Reject 7b. Expected: each answer decides only its own signature -- 7a State `approved`, Outcome `executed`; 7b State `rejected`, no Outcome line.

**Check 8 -- Typed answer.** File `<p>nota-8.txt`. Task: rename it to `<p>nota-8-ok.txt`. User: types an answer ("sí, aprobado") instead of choosing an option. Expected: nothing activates; State `pending`, no Outcome line, file unchanged. After 30 minutes with no activity from the requester (likely in OpenCode, whose sessions do not heartbeat) it reads State `orphaned`: the same result, still undecided.

**Check 9 -- How it looks.** File `<p>nota-9.txt`. Task: rename it to `<p>nota-9-ok.txt`. User: confirms the que