tercel/code-forge/verify
Claude Code and agent skill by tercel/code-forge
- community
Checking that the SKILL.md file is still in the repository.
Use before claiming ENGINEERING WORK is done, fixed, or passing — work whose correctness a command can demonstrate (tests, build, lint, type-check, a CLI run, a request against a running service). Requires running that command fresh and reading its output before any success claim. Prevents false completion claims, unverified assertions, and "should work". Do NOT use for verification that has no command to run — fact-checking a statement, confirming a document is accurate or complete, reconciling numbers in a spreadsheet, double-checking a translation, or "验证一下这个说法对不对". There is nothing to execute there, so this skill does not apply; check the source directly instead.
Install
npx vskill@latest install tercel/code-forge/verifySKILL.md
Code Forge — Verify
⚡ Execution Entry Point
@../shared/execution-entrypoint.md
For this skill: start at the first executable step. If you catch yourself about to say "falling back to manual verification", STOP and go to the indicated step.
Evidence-based completion verification. Run before claiming any work is done.
When to Use
- About to say "tests pass", "build succeeds", "bug is fixed", or "feature is complete"
- Before committing, creating a PR, or marking a task as done
- After any code change that should be verified
- When reviewing sub-agent output before trusting it
Note: code-forge:impl runs verification automatically. This skill is for general use.
When NOT to Use
The gate below is built on running a command and reading its output. When no such command exists, this skill has nothing to enforce — do not load it:
| Request | What to do instead | |
|---|---|---|
| Verify a claim, statement, or fact is true | Check the source directly; cite it | |
| Verify a document is accurate, complete, or consistent | spec-forge:audit / spec-forge:review | |
| Verify data, numbers, or a spreadsheet reconciles | Do the calculation and show the working | |
| Verify a translation, wording, or naming choice | Answer directly — it is a judgment call |
Note the distinction: verifying that the code does X is in scope; verifying that a sentence is true is not. When work is partly executable, verify the executable part with this skill and handle the rest directly — and say which is which.
Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE.
No exceptions. Not "it should work." Not "I just ran it." Not "the agent said it passed."
The Gate
Every completion claim must pass through this gate — because false claims waste reviewer time and erode trust in automated workflows. A single unverified "tests pass" can mask a regression that reaches production.
- SCOPE — confirm a command can settle the question. If the claim is about prose,
facts, data, or a judgment call rather than executable behavior (see §When NOT to Use), STOP: say so in one line, check the source directly, and do not run this gate. Never invent a command just to have something to run.
- IDENTIFY the verification command (test, build, lint, type-check)
- RUN the command fresh (not from memory, not from a previous run)
- READ the complete output (not skimmed, not truncated)
- VERIFY the output matches the claim (zero failures, exit code 0)
- ONLY THEN make the claim
Example:
- Before: "I fixed the off-by-one error, tests should pass now."
- Run:
npm test→ Output:42 passed, 0 failed - After: "Off-by-one fix verified — 42 tests pass (0 failures, exit 0)."
Forbidden Words
These words in a completion claim are red flags — they mean you haven't verified:
- "should work" / "should pass"
- "probably" / "likely"
- "seems to" / "appears to"
- "I believe" / "I think"
- "based on the changes"
- "it worked before"
Replace with evidence: "All 34 tests pass (output: 34 passed, 0 failed, exit code 0)."
If no automated verification exists, state that explicitly: "No automated test covers this — manual verification required: [steps]." This is honest, not hedging.
Verification Patterns
Tests
NOT: "Tests should pass now" or "I fixed the issue so tests will pass."
Regression Test
The revert-and-fail step proves the test actually catches the bug.
Build
Requirements Checklist
NOT: "Tests pass, so the feature is complete."
Sub-Agent Output
NEVER trust agent reports without independent verification.
Common Mistakes
- Trusting memory of a previous test run instead of running fresh
- Reading only the last line of output, missing errors above
- Claiming "build passes" after only running tests (or vice versa)
- Verifying one aspect but claiming completeness for all aspects
- Skipping verification "just this once" because it's a small change
Security
- Security scanPassed, 100 of 100Pattern checks on the skill's files.
- Model reviewPassed
Quality evaluation
- Task evaluationNot runNo evaluation yet. Run one in Skill Studio.
Source
- SKILL.md in the repositoryCheckingskills/verify/SKILL.md
Popularity
- Repository stars
- 3
- 7-day trend score
- 7
Stars and forks are for the whole GitHub repository, not this skill alone. Refreshed 7 May 2026, 6 months ago.
Works with
Any agent vskill installs to: 56 targets in all. These 39 have a page on this site.
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- GitHub Copilot
- Windsurf
- Codex
- Gemini CLI
- Cline
- Amp
- Roo Code
- Goose
- Continue
- Kilo Code
- Junie
- Trae
- OpenHands
- Qwen Code
- AI Agent
- Tabnine Chat
- Sourcegraph Cody
- Amazon Q
- Firebase Genkit
- Sweep
- Devin
- Phind
- Mentat
- Claude Desktop
- Aider
- GPT Pilot
- Plandex
- bolt.new
- v0
- Replit Agent
- Anse
- TypingMind
- BetterChatGPT
- LibreChat
- Warp AI
- Pieces
- Fig AI
Embed badge
[](https://verified-skill.com/skills/tercel/code-forge/verify)