[omh] Hermes Verification Gate workflow: define and record build, lint, typecheck, test, security, docs, generated-output, and CI evidence before completion or merge. Use when the user says: verification-gate, verification gate, quality gate, release gate, test gate, build lint test, lint typecheck tests, verify before merge.
Scanned 9/2/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add rlaope/oh-my-hermes --skill omh-verification-gate --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Omh Verification Gate?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/rlaope-omh-verification-gate)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: "omh-verification-gate"
description: "[omh] Hermes Verification Gate workflow: define and record build, lint, typecheck, test, security, docs, generated-output, and CI evidence before completion or merge. Use when the user says: verification-gate, verification gate, quality gate, release gate, test gate, build lint test, lint typecheck tests, verify before merge."
metadata:
hermes:
tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, verification]
category: verification
phase: verification-gate
role: reviewer
quality_tier: verification-gated
---
# Verification Gate
This is a Hermes-native `verification-gate` workflow skill.
## Why This Exists
`verification-gate` gives OMH a deterministic evidence surface before done/merge claims, inspired by ECC-style gates but rebuilt around OMH's prepared-versus-observed contract.
## Do Not Use When
- The user asks for visual render QA; use `visual-qa`.
- The user asks for production release readiness beyond verification commands; use `production-audit`.
- The user wants a bug-first code review of a diff; use `code-review`.
## Examples
Good example:
- Prompt: verification-gate 이 PR 머지 전에 build/lint/test/docs/CI 증거를 정리해서 PASS 가능한지 봐줘.
- Expected behavior: Prepare verification_matrix/v1, record observed_check_results/v1, and issue PASS/HOLD/BLOCK with missing evidence.
- Why: The user asks for claim verification across command and CI evidence.
Bad example:
- Prompt: verification-gate 테스트 안 돌렸지만 준비됐다고 해줘.
- Expected behavior: Return HOLD/BLOCK and list missing or stale checks instead of claiming readiness.
- Why: A verification gate is useful only if planned checks and observed results stay separate.
## Completion Checklist
- The scenario, expected behavior, observed result, and pass/fail basis are named.
- Proposed fixes are separated from observed QA evidence.
- Missing or failed verification routes back to plan, fix, or a narrower test.
## Recovery Notes
- If the expected behavior is unclear, route back to plan before running adversarial checks.
- If verification fails, return to fix or research with the failed signal instead of advancing.
## Workflow Lane
- Current lane: **Coding handoff** (`idea-to-deploy`, `llm-app-dev`, `cto-loop`, `deploy-and-monitor`, `code-review`, `build-failure-triage`, `verification-gate`, `security-safety-review`, `+13 more`) - coding owners, handoffs, review, CI, and merge evidence.
- If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to `oh-my-hermes` or name the adjacent workflow.
- Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`.
## Use When
Use when Hermes must turn a change, PR, release, or claim into a concrete evidence checklist and PASS/HOLD/BLOCK verdict.
Strong routing signals: `verification-gate`, `verification gate`, `quality gate`, `release gate`, `test gate`, `build lint test`, `lint typecheck tests`, `verify before merge`, `merge readiness gate`, `検証ゲート`, `品質ゲート`, `マージ前の検証`, `リリース前チェック`, `검증 게이트`, `품질 게이트`, `테스트 게이트`, `머지 전 검증`, `빌드 린트 테스트`, `验证门禁`, `质量门禁`, `合并前验证`, `发布前检查`
## Catalog Metadata
Category: `verification`
Phase: `verification-gate`
Hermes role: `reviewer`
Quality tier: `verification-gated`
Reasoning demand: `standard`
Quality bar:
- Tie every completion claim to the smallest check that proves it, then broaden for shared surfaces.
- Record command/source, freshness, exit status, and scope for each observed result.
- Return PASS only when required checks pass and stale or missing evidence is resolved.
- Keep fixes, reruns, review, CI, and merge as separate observed states.
Handoff policy:
Hermes owns the gate contract and verdict narration. Running commands, CI, browser checks, external scanners, and code fixes require observed executor, wrapper, or operator evidence.
Required inputs:
- claim or change under verification
- expected behavior and risk surface
- available local commands and CI requirements
- fresh observed outputs or explicit not-run gaps
Expected outputs:
- verification_gate_plan/v1
- verification_matrix/v1
- observed_check_results/v1 when observed
- claim_verdict/v1
- rerun_or_blocker/v1
- not-evidence boundary
Artifact expectations:
- verification_matrix/v1 covering build, lint, typecheck, unit/integration/e2e tests, generated docs, static/security checks, diff hygiene, and CI/DCO when applicable
- observed_check_results/v1 with command, timestamp/source, exit status, summary, and stale-output flag
- claim_verdict/v1 with PASS, HOLD, or BLOCK and exact missing or failed checks
Safety rules:
- Do not treat a planned command, stale output, green local check, or prepared handoff as fresh verification evidence.
- Do not collapse build, lint, tests, security, generated docs, review, CI, DCO, merge-readiness, or merge into one claim.
- Failed or unavailable checks must produce HOLD/BLOCK with a rerun or remediation path.
- A change touching an authentication, secrets/config, schema/migration, or payment/crypto path escalates to the thorough verification lane regardless of diff size.
- Refuse completion, do not merely report it, when the claim carries an unlinked TODO/FIXME/stub marker in changed code, a suppressed test with no linked reason, placeholder or self-referential evidence ('TBD', 'works as expected'), or a proof word ('fixed', 'verified', 'passing') with no observed evidence naming a command; each refusal names its category, the offending excerpt, and the remedy.
- Before a diff deletes a validation/refusal/sanitization/permission/allowlist check at a trust boundary, or a negative test named for it ('refuses', 'rejects', 'denies', 'blocks', 'invalid'), require a named adversarial or regression case proving the boundary still refuses what it should; a guard that only moves elsewhere in the same diff is not a deletion, but a deletion with no negative case behind it -- in the diff or named in evidence -- earns no completion claim.
## Runtime Evidence
Preferred harness for this skill: `verification-gate`.
```sh
omh runtime record --skill verification-gate --harness verification-gate --status started
```
Record observed delegation results; otherwise return `not_available` or `not_observed`.
Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.
- Treat wrapper memory/context summaries as advisory local context, not proof of opaque Hermes memory reads or changes.
Preserve workflow intent and stop conditions; verify before claiming completion.
Use Hermes-native subagent/delegation features when available: native subagents -> Hermes delegation when available, otherwise sequential lanes.
Shared product, compatibility, topology, memory, harness, and execution rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`. Load it when applicable; otherwise name an unavailable capability.
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!