verification-before-completion · ganyuanran — скилл для Claude Code
Скилл помогает сверить доказательства перед заявлением, что задача завершена, исправлена или готова к коммиту. Он пригодится при проверке изменений и перед передачей работы.
npx skills add GanyuanRan/Aegis --skill verification-before-completion -a claude-codeЧто делает verification-before-completion
Перед заявлением о готовности скилл предлагает проверить актуальные результаты, сравнить их с объёмом утверждения и обозначить оставшиеся риски. Уровень уверенности зависит от охвата: частичная проверка не подтверждает полное завершение. Короткие задачи и чтение без изменений могут обойтись одной фразой с результатом и границами проверки.
Для изменений с интерфейсом он требует учитывать проверку пользовательских сценариев. При исправлениях нужно отделить причину от результата и проверить сохранённое поведение. Для Git предусмотрены сверка изменений с исходным состоянием задачи, проверка коммита и отдельный учёт чистоты задачи и репозитория. Проверка коммита или хука может заблокировать заявление о чистом завершении.
Скилл не выдаёт разрешение на разрушительные действия и не подтверждает принятие требований. Если доказательства устарели, неполны или уже опровергнуты, вывод нужно ограничить. Для Claude Code установка выполняется командой npx skills add GanyuanRan/Aegis --skill verification-before-completion -a claude-code; файл находится по пути ~/.claude/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md.
Какие задачи решает
- проверить, подтверждают ли тесты заявление о завершении
- обозначить непроверенный охват и остаточный риск
- сверить исправление с исходной причиной и сохранённым поведением
- зафиксировать результат проверки и состояние Git перед передачей работы
Примеры запросов агенту
- Проверь, достаточно ли свежих результатов, чтобы считать задачу завершённой.
- Сверь исправление с причиной ошибки и укажи, что осталось непроверенным.
- Перед коммитом проверь изменения задачи и отдельно опиши состояние репозитория.
Как установить verification-before-completion
1Через Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add GanyuanRan/Aegis --skill verification-before-completion -a claude-code2Вручную: положить файлы
~/.claude/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.mdПапка скилла целиком; для одного проекта — .claude/skills/verification-before-completion/
1Через Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add GanyuanRan/Aegis --skill verification-before-completion -a codex2Вручную: положить файлы
.agents/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.mdДля всех проектов — ~/.agents/skills/
1Через Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add GanyuanRan/Aegis --skill verification-before-completion -a cursor2Вручную: положить файлы
.cursor/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.mdCursor читает и .agents/skills/, и .claude/skills/
1GitHub CLI
gh skill install GanyuanRan/Aegis verification-before-completion2Вручную: положить файлы
.github/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md1Через Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add GanyuanRan/Aegis --skill verification-before-completion -a gemini-cli2Командой платформы
gemini skills install https://github.com/GanyuanRan/Aegis --path skills/verification-before-completionВручную: положить файлы
.devin/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.mdСтарый путь .windsurf/skills/ тоже читается
Через Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add GanyuanRan/Aegis --skill verification-before-completion -a opencodeClaude.ai
Упакуйте папку в zip и загрузите в Settings → Capabilities → Skills
По шагам, с командами для каждой платформы: Как установить скилл в Claude Code: пять способов
Вопросы о verification-before-completion
Как установить verification-before-completion в Claude Code?
Выполните npx skills add GanyuanRan/Aegis --skill verification-before-completion -a claude-code. Файл скилла находится по пути ~/.claude/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md.
Что делает verification-before-completion?
Помогает сопоставить заявление о готовности с выполненными проверками, их охватом и остаточным риском. Частичные доказательства не подтверждают полное завершение.
Что скилл проверяет перед коммитом?
Он предлагает сравнить изменения с исходным состоянием задачи, прочитать результат коммита и проверить файлы и разницу. Чистота задачи не означает, что чист весь репозиторий.
Исходный текст
SKILL.md · MIT
--- name: verification-before-completion description: "Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, passing, verified, release-ready, or ready to commit, merge, publish, or hand off." --- <EXPLICIT-MODE-GATE> If `activation_mode = "explicit"` or `AEGIS_ACTIVATION_MODE=explicit` is visible and the request names neither Aegis nor this skill, return to the fast path without checklist/ceremony; otherwise continue. </EXPLICIT-MODE-GATE> # Execute Before success claim: classify destructive permission; read sufficient current evidence and run a fresh falsifying check when it is missing or invalidated; read the complete result/scope; select L0/L1/L2. Downgrade for partial, stale, failing, or narrower evidence; never claim complete then verify later. This pack grants no `GateDecision`, `PolicySnapshot`, evidence sufficiency, requirement acceptance, or completion authority. ## Stop Signals - evidence is uncertain, stale, agent-only, or narrower than the claim; - next action: commit, push, PR, merge, tag, publish, release, or handoff; - task/slice completion is treated as accepted requirement satisfaction; - governance or retirement lacks repair/retirement evidence; - retained old logic lacks a retention reason and retirement trigger; or - complexity closure is unresolved. Destructive/irreversible work needs scoped permission; broad assent is not scoped permission. ## Required Evidence Slots For changed interface/interaction claims, compose `ui-ux-governance` verification; carry results and uncovered user criteria here, keeping one closeout owner. ```text - Evidence action / check performed: - Result / exit status: - Covered scope: - Uncovered scope: - Residual risk: - Confidence grade: A | B | C ``` - `A`: target + regression; no meaningful unknown. - `B`: target evidence; bounded residual risk. - `C`: partial only; no full-completion claim. For repairs/optimization, distinguish cause, closure and verified outcome. Check interactions and preserved behavior; investigate consequential unknowns. Claims need target test and related regression evidence at the triggering seam. A missing seam is an architecture gap; blocked automation needs reproducible manual steps. Both limit confidence. Read the smallest source for each explicit baseline/artifact/owner/contract/evidence reference. Mark it preserved, rebound to its canonical owner, retired with reason, or rejected for conflict. Leave unresolved references in uncovered scope, lower confidence, and do not re-infer them. Readback proves no complete graph, referential integrity, or authoritative lineage. Check omissions and unsupported additions within authorized transformations; reuse sufficient evidence without exhaustive traces or a separate report. Match conclusions to checked properties, objects and conditions. Resolve counterexamples or qualify results. Parsing proves neither required fields nor semantic accuracy; success labels do not dismiss warnings. Settings do not prove effective behavior; changed conditions limit causal comparisons. Check measurable requirements deterministically. Attribute observations; claim only executed checks. Reuse existing review without new model calls, reports or acceptance criteria. Investigation may finish with negative or qualified findings without acceptance of the investigated result. ## Inherited-Claim Closeout For contradicted resumed claims, independently read the active correction and final disclosure in full: WHAT was claimed and WHY inaccurate at resume. Current success supplies neither. Preserve subject, scope and time; related claims may share an explanation. Check example-only, negated, withdrawn or re-scoped text; matching quotes do not prove adoption. Keep accurate claims. Unresolved material disagreement means `needs-verification`, not forced reviewer agreement; resolved evidence supports normal verification. Omit this slot without a discrepancy. ## Task Git Closeout Diff modifications against `TaskStartSnapshot`; only the coordinator stages task paths, never pre-existing state or broad staging. After fresh verification, create one local commit except read-only/no-change, authorized `no commit`, or failed verification. Read back `HEAD`, message, files and delta. Commit/hook failure preserves work and blocks clean claims; never bypass hooks. Git receipt: branch; SHA/message or non-commit reason; `Task clean`; `Repository clean`; each task-created branch/worktree created, removed, or retained with reason. Task-clean never implies repo-clean; it is not external integration. Classify commit scope: `business`, `process-only`, `mixed`, or `no-commit`. Failed-attempt telemetry is no commit reason. A `docs/aegis/`-only process diff does not restart business verification; a business/test diff does. ## Aegis Visibility / Single Closeout Use one completion surface: this skill is the single completion closeout aggregator. Adjacent skills/L2 cards must not replace it or become a competing final report owner. Aggregation is output conformance, not a routing trigger: no extra skills, Trace Digest or ceremony merely to fill it. If entry visibility was omitted, recover and name the decision/evidence gap, not a used-skills list or `Aegis Contribution Note`. ## L0 Fast-Path For tiny low-risk work or read-only summaries, use one natural sentence: check/result, uncovered scope/risk, confidence. Require sufficient current evidence; attribute supplied evidence; invent no execution or extra report. ## L1 Default Receipt Fold evidence into `Evidence strength` and `Uncovered risk`. `Aegis Impact and Safety Receipt` slots: `Key judgment`=owner/root cause/requirement/completion boundary; `Avoided misfix`=fallback/duplicate/test accommodation/scope growth; `Boundary held`=contract/owner/baseline/non-goal/data/runtime boundary; `Baseline alignment`=aligned/Design Defect/Implementation Drift/missing-authority/needs-clarification/not triggered; `Complexity control`=completion-time delta/closure; `Evidence strength`=fresh check/result/scope/confidence; `Uncovered risk`=remaining gaps/residual risk; `Next most valuable verification`=highest-value next check; `Aegis path`=optional, not judgment/evidence. Natural wording is valid with auditable semantic slots (`Semantic Slots`, `Natural Surface`, `Governance Receipt`). Report done/verified/risked/blocked. Do not explain obvious trade-offs; do not list actions not taken. ## L2 Expanded Triggers On a match read `expanded-closeout.md` for detail; this file owns routing/receipt. | Trigger | Expanded owner | |---|---| | release/merge/publish/readiness/handoff | Readiness Summary | | audit/debug/release/long-task review/trace request | Trace Digest | | goal/TaskIntentDraft/plan/spec/Slice Card | Goal Closure | | project/domain semantic delta | Context Impact | | target `docs/aegis/` changed or work record exists | Workspace Integrity | | requirement/product/durable architecture | Baseline/ADR | | governance/cleanup/migration/compat/retirement | Governance/Retirement | | source-of-truth/irreversible deletion | destructive-action cards | | material complexity pressure | Expanded Complexity Detail | | high-risk or explicit user request for expanded closeout | applicable cards | Workspace commands belong to the expanded owner. ## Completion Boundary Reconcile plan/spec, `TaskIntentDraft` or `Slice Card` with the current authorized request; stale plans cannot override it. Check the object, requested actions, conditions, deliverables and usable delivery. Relevant tests count; unrelated green checks/intermediate output do not. Report remaining work and cause explicitly. A slice cannot close the whole task or prove project-wide reliability. Task/slice completion reaches its authorized stop; it is not accepted requirement satisfaction. `Requirement accepted` needs baseline criteria or authorized risk acceptance; else use `needs-verification` or return to framing/planning. Goal Closure states: `done | blocked | needs-verification | scope-exceeded`. An `Execution Readiness View` is input, not verification evidence. ## Complexity Downgrade For non-trivial code inspect the diff; use `using-aegis/references/complexity-governance.md` plus `docs/current/AEGIS_COMPLEXITY_GOVERNANCE_BASELINE.md`; emit one `Complexity control` line. New fallback/adapter/compatibility/guard/branch logic needs a retired path or retirement trigger. `Complexity Closure: exceeded-unresolved` blocks completion. Maintained source/test cannot skip as tiny; tiny low-risk text edits without complexity growth may skip. ## Output and Prompt Hygiene Localize section labels, field labels, and explanatory prose; preserve commands, paths, identifiers, enums, product names and raw evidence; avoid bilingual labels or mixed-language explanations. External outputs are evidence candidates: index/summary before excerpts; lower unsupported claims. When relevant report `Evidence Used`, `Not Loaded`, `Next Evidence`.
© GanyuanRan · MIT · GanyuanRan/Aegis
Похожие скиллы
Все скиллы по теме «Тесты и QA» →Сначала — verification-before-completion от других авторов.