Formal phase gate — checks intent, plan, and execution artifacts for drift, then actively re-checks each load-bearing claim against its source (an agent's self-report of having checked is not evidence). Requires the intent and execution artifacts (the plan is optional; an absent plan short-circuits to a plan-not-found verdict). Produces structured output. Trigger when the user runs /verify or needs to decide whether to proceed to the next phase. Not /double-check (quick re-check of one claim)...
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add allemaar/open-skills --skill verify --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Verify?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/allemaar-verify)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: verify
description: "Formal phase gate — checks intent, plan, and execution artifacts for drift, then actively re-checks each load-bearing claim against its source (an agent's self-report of having checked is not evidence). Requires the intent and execution artifacts (the plan is optional; an absent plan short-circuits to a plan-not-found verdict). Produces structured output. Trigger when the user runs /verify or needs to decide whether to proceed to the next phase. Not /double-check (quick re-check of one claim), /reflect (informal thinking, no gate), or /insight-critique (advisory output review) — verify is the formal gate against intent, plan, and execution."
visibility: public
self-improvable: true
next-skills:
- skill: github-sync
phrase: "/github-sync"
why: "Commit and push when the verdict is clean"
- skill: plan-create
phrase: "/plan-create"
why: "Redesign if the verdict surfaced drifts"
- skill: investigate
phrase: "/investigate"
why: "Dig deeper if the verdict surfaced issues that need fact-gathering"
triggers:
- "/verify"
---
# /verify
`/verify` is a formal phase gate. It checks three artifacts against each other — the **intent** (the original goal), the **plan** (the stated approach), and the **execution** (what was actually done) — and reports whether they still align before you proceed.
It hard-gates on two of them: the **intent** and the **execution**. If either is absent it stops and names what is missing, rather than guessing. The **plan** is optional — when absent, verify reports `status: plan-not-found` rather than failing. For a softer pause with no artifact requirement, use `/reflect`; for a quick re-read of a single claim, use `/double-check`.
> **Structured execution spec:** [`protocol.yon`](protocol.yon). It carries the canonical preconditions, step sequence, and routing as named, validatable records; this file is the human-facing explanation. The two must stay in sync — if you edit one, update the other and refresh the `@STAMP` date.
## Preconditions
Two artifacts hard-gate the run: the **intent** and the **execution**. If either is missing, verify aborts and says so — there is nothing to align without both. The **plan** may be absent: when it is, verify skips the plan and execution checks and reports `status: plan-not-found` rather than failing.
## The five phases
1. **Intent check.** Using the intent as ground truth, name any drift between the original goal and the current direction — with evidence.
2. **Plan check.** Does the plan match the intent? Look for scope creep, missing steps, unstated assumptions, over-engineering. Cite specific sections.
3. **Execution check.** Does the execution match the plan? Look for skipped steps, deviations, unplanned changes, incomplete work. Cite specific evidence.
4. **Source re-check (active, per-claim — the load-bearing gate).** For every load-bearing factual claim in the execution or output, re-open the source that would confirm or refute it and check it directly; revise the claim if wrong. A claim not re-checked against its source is reported `unverified`, never as passing. The agent's own report that it "already checked" is NOT evidence — only a fresh read of the source counts. When assessing a claim, pose it as a question ("Is X true, per the source?"), not a statement to confirm. **When the claim is about a committed, built, or published artifact, re-check against the *consumed* form — the committed blob (`git show <ref>:<path>`), the built `dist`/tarball, or the published version — not the mutable working tree; a dirty tree or a stale dist can pass a claim while the committed HEAD / shipped artifact is broken (grepping the working tree is not verifying the commit). Exception: when uncommitted WIP is itself the artifact under verification, the working copy is the correct source.** *(Grounded in the critical-thinking arc: passive/optional verification lets false claims through; a mandated active re-check catches them. The consumed-artifact clause was added 2026-07-07 after `/verify` returned clean on a working-tree grep while the committed HEAD shipped two CLI verbs dead — same family as tsc-green≠verified and served-route-shadows-source.)*
5. **Report.** Produce a structured verdict: `clean` (true/false), `gaps`, `drifts`, `issues`, and a `status` of `clean | gaps-found | plan-not-found | incomplete | unverified`. A `clean: true` verdict must cite evidence, must follow substantive analysis of all prior phases, and requires every load-bearing claim to have passed the phase-4 source re-check.
## Routing
The verdict points to the next move: `/investigate` when issues were found, `/plan-create` when the run surfaced drift from the intent, and `/github-sync` when the verdict is clean.
## Boundary
`verify` is the formal self-gate against intent, plan, and execution artifacts. It is not `/cold-review` (outside-agent review of work artifacts), not `/insight-critique` (advisory review of one output), and not `/double-check` (a quick targeted re-read of a single claim). A clean verdict is not a substitute for tests or a build where those are required. Verification is active and per-claim: a passive alignment pass, or an agent's self-report of having checked, does not satisfy it.
> **Human output.** This skill's handler-facing output obeys the human-output
> contract (`human-output/SKILL.md`).
> **Self-improvement.** On completion, run the Self-Improvement Protocol (`self-improve/SKILL.md`): if this run surfaced a concrete, blocking-or-recurring weakness in this skill, propose a specific fix for the handler to approve. Conservative — silent otherwise. Never auto-apply.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!