Skip to content
Development
Skill

/verification

Use when judging whether a task reached its goal, not just finished: the gate function, self-critique gate, validation levels, evidence array protocol, and goal-backward lens. Task completion is not goal achievement.

From plugin
cc10x
16822 skills14 agents

Claude Code

$ npx -y skills add romiluz13/cc10x --skill verification --agent claude-code

SKILL.md

verification.SKILL.md
name: verification
description: |
  Use when judging whether a task reached its goal, not just finished: the gate function,
  self-critique gate, validation levels, evidence array protocol, and goal-backward lens.
  Task completion is not goal achievement.
allowed-tools: Read Bash Grep Glob
user-invocable: false

Verification

**Task completion is not goal achievement.** Verify that the phase achieved its goal, not that prior agents said it did. If you cannot independently reproduce a claimed success, return FAIL.

Reference Files

  • `references/live-production-testing.md` — live/production verification strategy

The Gate Function

COMPLETION → TRUTH → PROOF

1. **Completion:** Did the agent finish its task? (contract says PASS) 2. **Truth:** Is the work actually correct? (independent verification) 3. **Proof:** Can you prove it with evidence? (exit codes, test output, screenshots)

A PASS without proof is a claim. When a result surprises you in either direction — a pass that came too easily, or a failure you cannot explain — suspect the observation method before the system: confirm the check runs the right command against the current build and exercises the real code path before theorizing about the code.

<!-- Authoring rule (maintenance, not runtime): every gate in this skill encodes an observed failure mode; understand what a gate prevents before removing it. -->

Self-Critique Gate (BEFORE Verification Commands)

Before running any test, audit your own work:

**Code Quality:**

  • [ ] No TODO/FIXME/stubs in changed files
  • [ ] No commented-out code
  • [ ] No debug logging left in
  • [ ] Error handling covers the failure modes the change introduces
  • [ ] Types are correct (not `as any` or `as unknown`)

**Implementation Completeness:**

  • [ ] Every acceptance criterion from the plan has corresponding code
  • [ ] Every named scenario has a test
  • [ ] Every error path in the plan has handling
  • [ ] No silent failures (empty catches, discarded errors)
  • [ ] Build succeeds, type-check passes

**Self-Critique Verdict:** If any check fails, fix it BEFORE running verification. Don't run tests you know will fail on code quality issues — a known-failing run produces noise evidence that then has to be explained away.

Validation Levels

| Level | What | Exit Code | When | | ------- | ------ | ----------- | ------ | | **Deterministic** | Automated test | 0/1 | Always — the default | | **Probabilistic** | Test with known flake rate | 0/1 (retry policy) | When deterministic impossible (timing, network) | | **Manual** | Human verifies with checklist | n/a | When automation not worth the cost | | **Live** | Production-like environment | 0/1 | When plan requires live proof |

Every verification must state its validation level — unlabeled evidence lets weak proof masquerade as strong. If manual, state the checklist. Manual evidence is a validation level for verification, never a substitute for a TDD RED or GREEN exit code: with no test runner and no scripted check, require a runner or block. If deterministic, state the command + exit code. If live, state the harness command.

Production-Like Live Proof

When the plan includes `### Live Verification Strategy` or a harness manifest:

  • Run `python3 "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/tools/live_harness_runner.py" --manifest <path> --mode proof`
  • If stress required: also run `--mode stress`
  • Do NOT silently substitute replay fixtures or unit tests for required live proof

**Flaky test handling:** re-run once — one retry separates environment blips from real flake; more retries launder genuine failures. Pass on re-run → mark PASS with `flaky: true`. Fail both → FAIL. Never convert flaky pass into unconditional confidence.

Evidence Array Protocol (MANDATORY for PASS)

EVIDENCE:
  scenarios:
    - "[name] | Given [state] | When [action] | [command] → exit [code] | expected=[expected] | actual=[actual]"
  regressions:
    - "[test] → exit [code]: [result]"
  edge_cases:
    - "[case]: [command] → exit [code]: [result]"

Every scenario needs non-empty Expected and Actual. Every scenario maps to exactly one EVIDENCE entry. SCENARIOS_PASSED must equal EVIDENCE.scenarios with exit 0 + Result=PASS. Run each check against the revision being verified; if the code changes after a check, re-run the affected scenarios before citing them. Record the tested identity with the evidence: the commit SHA, plus a patch or digest when the tree is dirty; evidence that does not identify the revision it was produced from is unverified, not PASS.

Goal-Backward Lens

Walk backward from the goal to verify it was achieved:

1. **What was the goal?** (re-read the plan's exit criteria) 2. **What would prove it?** (name the specific evidence) 3. **Do I have that evidence?** (run the verification) 4. **Does the evidence actually prove the goal?** (not "tests pass" but "the tests test the right thing")

Common Failures

| Failure | What happens | Fix | | --------- | ------------- | ----- | | **False green** | Test passes without exercising the real code path | Test Honesty Gates (see integration-verifier) | | **Tautological check** | Expected value recomputed the way the code computes it, e.g. `expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b)` — passes by construction | Expected values come from an independent source of truth: a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec | | **Scope skip** | "All tests pass" but untested scenarios exist | Goal-backward lens: name every scenario, verify each | | **Stale evidence** | "Tests pass" but you didn't run them this session | Re-run. Evidence must be from THIS session. | | **Claim without proof** | "It works" with no command/exit code | Evidence array is mandatory for PASS | | **Pointer-as-proof** | Path cited as PASS without re-opening it | Re-open the artifact; if it does not show the claim, downgrade or re-run. Never cite it as PASS | | **Untested claim** | A scenario or claim the return never addresses | Mark it untested

Read more
@romiluz13
Ships withcc10x

The Loop Engine for Claude Code — engineer the loop, not the prompt. 1 router · 14 agents · 21 skills · 8 workflows. Fail-closed gates, test honesty, anti-anchored review.

16822 skills14 agents
Get the whole plugin

Stars on GitHub

Momentum

stars in total
168
Star history of romiluz13/cc10x on GitHub, a chart by star-history.com

Other skills on cc10x.

agent-common

agent-common

Use when a cc10x agent starts a task: the shared preamble for the memory protocol, the contract format, and the output rules.

@romiluz13@romiluz13Install Skill
architecture

architecture

Greenfield architecture design: map functionality flows, draw components, design APIs, classify dependencies, plan observability.…

@romiluz13@romiluz13Install Skill
building

building

Use when writing production code test-first: the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle, false-RED detection, vertical slicing, scope…

@romiluz13@romiluz13Install Skill
cc10x-guide

cc10x-guide

Answers questions about cc10x itself — what it is, how to install and configure it, how the router, workflows, memory, and hooks…

@romiluz13@romiluz13Install Skill
cc10x-router

cc10x-router

Routes build, debug, review, plan, QA, and triage requests through the cc10x workflows (task graphs, workflow artifacts, gates);…

@romiluz13@romiluz13Install Skill
code-review

code-review

Two-mode skill: (1) adversarial review — spec compliance + code quality + security, confidence-scored findings with file:line…

@romiluz13@romiluz13Install Skill

More skills from other plugins.

brainstorming
Auto-invoked

brainstorming

You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, modifying behavior, or…

@obra@obraInstall Skill
ask-matt

ask-matt

Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the skills in this repo.

skills2w309k
@mattpocock@mattpocockInstall Skill
accessibility
Auto-invoked

accessibility

Design, implement, and audit accessible UI to WCAG 2.2 Level AA across Web, iOS, and Android — semantic ARIA roles and labels,…

ecc2w293k
@affaan-m@affaan-mInstall Skill
compiler-commit

compiler-commit

Use when you want to verify compiler changes and commit with the correct convention. Runs tests, lint, and format, then commits…

react5d252k
@facebook@facebookInstall Skill

Questions about verification.

Which coding agents can use verification?
verification 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.