Skip to content
Back to skills

Verification Before Completion

ASecurity

Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, passing, or findings are confirmed - requires running verification and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

  • 7 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added May 26, 2026
testingrustgoexpress

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned May 27, 2026

npx -y skills add rhowardstone/Claude-Code-Scientist --skill verification-before-completion --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Verification Before Completion?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Verification Before Completion
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/rhowardstone-verification-before-completion/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/rhowardstone-verification-before-completion)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: verification-before-completion
description: Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, passing, or findings are confirmed - requires running verification and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
---

# Verification Before Completion

## 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 in this message, you cannot claim it passes.

## The Gate Function

```
BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:

1. IDENTIFY: What command/check proves this claim?
2. RUN: Execute the FULL verification (fresh, complete)
3. READ: Full output, check results, 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" |
| Build succeeds | Build command: exit 0 | Linter passing, looks good |
| Bug fixed | Test original symptom: passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |
| Experiment worked | Data shows expected result | Protocol completed, assumed success |
| Finding confirmed | Statistical test: significant | Pattern observed, assumed real |
| Replication succeeded | Same result within tolerance | Similar result, close enough |
| Analysis complete | All steps executed, output verified | Script ran without errors |
| 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/publish/report without verification
- Trusting automated reports without checking
- 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 |
| "Script passed" | Script success ≠ correct results |
| "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

**Software - Tests:**
```
✅ [Run test command] [See: 34/34 pass] "All tests pass"
❌ "Should pass now" / "Looks correct"
```

**Software - Build:**
```
✅ [Run build] [See: exit 0] "Build passes"
❌ "Linter passed" (linter doesn't check compilation)
```

**Research - Experiment:**
```
✅ [Check data] [See: effect size X, p < 0.05] "Hypothesis supported"
❌ "Experiment completed" / "Data collected"
```

**Research - Replication:**
```
✅ [Compare results] [See: within 5% of original] "Replication successful"
❌ "Protocol followed correctly"
```

**Requirements:**
```
✅ Re-read requirements → Create checklist → Verify each → Report gaps or completion
❌ "Tests pass, phase complete"
```

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

## Why This Matters

From past failures:
- Trust broken: "I don't believe you"
- Broken code shipped: would crash in production
- False findings reported: would fail replication
- Missing requirements shipped: incomplete work
- Time wasted on false completion → redirect → rework
- Violates: "Honesty is a core value."

## When To Apply

**ALWAYS before:**
- ANY variation of success/completion claims
- ANY expression of satisfaction
- ANY positive statement about work state
- Committing, publishing, reporting, sharing
- Moving to next task
- Delegating to agents

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

## The Bottom Line

**No shortcuts for verification.**

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

This is non-negotiable.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.