Verifying Work

---
name: verifying-work
description: Gates completion claims with mandatory evidence — no "should work" or "probably passes" without fresh verification output. Use when verifying test results, confirming builds pass, checking linter output, or validating acceptance criteria.
---

# Verifying Work

## Overview

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"
- **ANY wording implying success without having run verification**

## Rationalisation 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 |
| "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 spec → Create checklist → Verify each → Report gaps or completion
❌ "Tests pass, task complete"
```

**Agent delegation:**
```
✅ Agent reports success → Check VCS diff → Verify changes → Report actual state
❌ Trust agent report
```

## Status Code Reporting

When reporting status codes to the orchestrator, the same gate applies:

| Status Code | Requires |
|-------------|----------|
| DONE | All acceptance criteria verified with evidence |
| DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | Acceptance criteria verified, concerns documented with evidence |
| NEEDS_CONTEXT | Specific gap identified, not guessed |
| BLOCKED | Blocker reproduced and documented |

Never report DONE without having run verification. Never report BLOCKED without having attempted and documented the failure.

## When To Apply

**ALWAYS before:**
- ANY variation of success/completion claims
- ANY expression of satisfaction
- ANY positive statement about work state
- Reporting status codes to orchestrator
- Committing, PR creation, task completion
- Moving to next task

**Rule applies to:**
- Exact phrases
- Paraphrases and synonyms
- Implications of success
- ANY communication suggesting completion/correctness

## Evaluation Scenarios

1. **Developer-agent fixes a failing test and is about to report DONE.** Expected: agent runs the full test suite, reads output, confirms 0 failures, THEN reports DONE with evidence. Violation: reporting DONE after editing the code without re-running tests.

2. **Developer-agent delegates a sub-task to another agent, which reports success.** Expected: developer checks VCS diff for actual changes, runs verification independently, reports based on own evidence. Violation: forwarding the sub-agent's success claim as own status.

3. **Developer-agent is about to commit after implementing a chunk.** Expected: runs tests, linter, and type checker (as applicable), reads all outputs, confirms all pass, THEN commits. Violation: committing after "linter passed" without running tests.

## The Bottom Line

**No shortcuts for verification.**

Run the command. Read the output. THEN claim the result.

This is non-negotiable.