Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
Scanned 5/27/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add GadaaLabs/claude-code-on-steroids --skill sentinel --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Sentinel?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/gadaalabs-sentinel)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: sentinel
description: Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
---
# Verification Before Completion
## Overview
**SENTINEL** — *A sentinel stands at the gate and lets nothing through without challenge.*
When invoked: blocks any claim of "done" until fresh verification evidence exists — tests run, output checked, edge cases confirmed. No evidence, no completion.
Claiming work is complete without verification is dishonesty, not efficiency.
**Core principle:** Evidence before claims, always.
**Violating the letter of this rule is violating the spirit of this rule.**
## The Iron Law
```
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE
```
If you haven't run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.
## The Gate Function
```
BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:
1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?
2. RUN: Execute the FULL command (fresh, complete)
3. READ: Full output, check exit code, count failures
4. VERIFY: Does output confirm the claim?
- If NO: State actual status with evidence
- If YES: State claim WITH evidence
5. ONLY THEN: Make the claim
Skip any step = lying, not verifying
```
## Common Failures
| Claim | Requires | Not Sufficient |
|-------|----------|----------------|
| Tests pass | Test command output: 0 failures | Previous run, "should pass" |
| Linter clean | Linter output: 0 errors | Partial check, extrapolation |
| Build succeeds | Build command: exit 0 | Linter passing, logs look good |
| Bug fixed | Test original symptom: passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |
| Regression test works | Red-green cycle verified | Test passes once |
| Agent completed | VCS diff shows changes | Agent reports "success" |
| Requirements met | Line-by-line checklist | Tests passing |
## Red Flags - STOP
- Using "should", "probably", "seems to"
- Expressing satisfaction before verification ("Great!", "Perfect!", "Done!", etc.)
- About to commit/push/PR without verification
- Trusting agent success reports
- Relying on partial verification
- Thinking "just this once"
- Tired and wanting work over
- **ANY wording implying success without having run verification**
## Rationalization Prevention
| Excuse | Reality |
|--------|---------|
| "Should work now" | RUN the verification |
| "I'm confident" | Confidence ≠ evidence |
| "Just this once" | No exceptions |
| "Linter passed" | Linter ≠ compiler |
| "Agent said success" | Verify independently |
| "I'm tired" | Exhaustion ≠ excuse |
| "Partial check is enough" | Partial proves nothing |
| "Different words so rule doesn't apply" | Spirit over letter |
## Key Patterns
**Tests:**
```
✅ [Run test command] [See: 34/34 pass] "All tests pass"
❌ "Should pass now" / "Looks correct"
```
**Regression tests (TDD Red-Green):**
```
✅ Write → Run (pass) → Revert fix → Run (MUST FAIL) → Restore → Run (pass)
❌ "I've written a regression test" (without red-green verification)
```
**Build:**
```
✅ [Run build] [See: exit 0] "Build passes"
❌ "Linter passed" (linter doesn't check compilation)
```
**Requirements:**
```
✅ Re-read plan → Create checklist → Verify each → Report gaps or completion
❌ "Tests pass, phase complete"
```
**Agent delegation:**
```
✅ Agent reports success → Check VCS diff → Verify changes → Report actual state
❌ Trust agent report
```
## Why This Matters
From 24 failure memories:
- your human partner said "I don't believe you" - trust broken
- Undefined functions shipped - would crash
- Missing requirements shipped - incomplete features
- Time wasted on false completion → redirect → rework
- Violates: "Honesty is a core value. If you lie, you'll be replaced."
## When To Apply
**ALWAYS before:**
- ANY variation of success/completion claims
- ANY expression of satisfaction
- ANY positive statement about work state
- Committing, PR creation, task completion
- Moving to next task
- Delegating to agents
**Rule applies to:**
- Exact phrases
- Paraphrases and synonyms
- Implications of success
- ANY communication suggesting completion/correctness
## Confidence Scoring Gate
**After verification passes, score your own confidence BEFORE marking complete:**
```
CONFIDENCE SELF-ASSESSMENT
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Ask yourself:
1. Do all edge cases have test coverage? [Yes/No/Partial]
2. Do I fully understand why the fix works? [Yes/No]
3. Are there side effects I haven't tested? [Yes/No]
4. Would I be comfortable in a code review? [Yes/No]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**Score → Action:**
| Score | Confidence | Action |
|-------|-----------|--------|
| 4 Yes | HIGH | Mark complete, proceed |
| 3 Yes | MEDIUM | Invoke `tribunal` before marking complete |
| ≤ 2 Yes | LOW | Invoke `hunter` — root cause not fully understood |
| Security/arch task | ANY | ALWAYS invoke `tribunal` |
**Announce score:**
```
CONFIDENCE: HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
Action: [proceeding / requesting code review / re-investigating]
```
**Never suppress a MEDIUM or LOW score to avoid review. That is the same as lying.**
---
## The Bottom Line
**No shortcuts for verification. No suppressed confidence.**
Run the command. Read the output. Score your confidence. THEN claim the result.
This is non-negotiable.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!