Verify

Prove it works before saying it works.

Hard Rules

Do not claim completion without fresh terminal evidence from this session.
Forbidden words in completion claims: "should", "probably", "seems to", "likely", "I believe", "I think it works". These signal unverified assertions.
Cached, remembered, or previous-session output is not evidence. Run it again.
A change that alters anything a user or caller sees requires a dev-smoke run, whatever the claim is called.

Gate Function

Every completion claim must pass all steps in order:

Classify — Does the change alter anything a user or caller sees (CLI output, API response, UI, displayed status or state, file formats)? If yes, dev-smoke is required evidence alongside tests.
Identify — What command proves this claim? If multiple commands are needed, run the gate once per command.
Run — Execute the full command now. No partial runs, no skipping.
Read — Read complete output. Check exit code. Count pass/fail.
Confirm — Does the output prove the exact claim?
Report — State the result in the Report Format below.

If any step fails, stop. Fix the issue and restart from step 0.

If no verification command exists (e.g., no test suite), tell the user and ask them how to verify before claiming done.

Verification Patterns

Claim	Required Evidence	Not Sufficient
Tests pass	Test output: 0 failures, exit 0	Previous run, "should pass now"
Build succeeds	Build output: exit 0	Linter passing, partial build
Bug is fixed	Symptom reproduced at the level the user saw it (CLI/API/UI) → now gone, plus a regression test	"Changed code, should be fixed"; unit test alone for a user-visible bug
Linter clean	Linter output: 0 errors	Single file check
Phase complete	Each criterion verified individually	"Tests pass, so done"
Feature works	`dev-smoke` run or E2E test	Unit tests alone

Report Format

List every evidence type, so a skipped check is visible:

Tests: <command> → exit <n>, <pass>/<fail>
Lint/format: <command> → exit <n>
Regression check: test fails without the fix? yes/no/not a bug fix
Smoke: ran (<flow>, result) | not applicable (<why the change is not user-facing>) | skipped (user asked)

Regression Verification

For bug fixes, a single pass is not enough:

Write a test covering the bug.
Run → must pass (fix in place).
Revert the fix.
Run → must fail (proves test catches the bug).
Restore the fix.
Run → must pass.

If step 4 passes, the test is wrong. Rewrite it.

Revert with a patch, never git stash — git stash pop restores whatever stash is on top, which may not be yours:

git diff -- <fix paths> > "$SCRATCH/fix.patch" && git apply -R "$SCRATCH/fix.patch"
# run tests (must fail)
git apply "$SCRATCH/fix.patch"

Red Flags and Rationalizations

Rationalization	Why It's Wrong	Do Instead
"This change is trivial"	Trivial changes break things constantly	Run the check
"I ran it earlier"	Code changed since then	Run it again now
"The test is flaky"	Flaky ≠ ignorable	Fix the flake first
"It compiles, so it works"	Compilation ≠ correctness	Run the tests
"The CI will catch it"	CI is a safety net, not a substitute	Verify locally first
"The agent said it's done"	Agent claims need verification too	Check diff and run tests
"Unit tests and fixtures cover it"	They test logic on mocked inputs, not the flow a user runs	Run `dev-smoke`, or state why the change is not user-facing
"I'll call it 'tests pass', not 'feature works'"	Narrow wording doesn't change what was changed	Classify the change (step 0) first

Memory Integration

After a failed verification, store the failure pattern: npx ai-devkit@latest memory store --title "<failure pattern>" --content "<what failed and how to avoid>" --tags "verify,failure-pattern"

Task Tracing

If a task name is known and tracing is usable, record task evidence after the verification report per task. If tracing was not probed, run the real read probe first. If probe or evidence recording fails, report the failed task command and continue verification; never block verification on optional task logging.

verify