CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

verify

AI DevKit · Enforce evidence-based completion claims — require fresh command output before reporting success. Use when completing any task, fixing a bug, finishing a phase, running tests, building, deploying, or making any "it works" claim.

Quality

86%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

88%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

An exemplarily lean, actionable discipline skill: hard rules, a gated verification workflow with explicit failure loops, a claim-to-evidence mapping table, and a rigorous regression procedure with an executable patch-based revert. Its only notable weaknesses are the undefined `dev-smoke` invocation, the vague Task Tracing section, and no reference split for supplementary content.

Suggestions

Show how to run `dev-smoke` (an example command or pointer to its docs), since it is required evidence for any user-facing change.

Make Task Tracing concrete: give the actual probe/evidence-recording commands, or drop the section if tracing is environment-specific.

Consider moving the Red Flags and Rationalizations table to a one-level-deep reference file to keep the core gate workflow front and center.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body contains no explanations of concepts Claude already knows — even the git stash warning ("git stash pop restores whatever stash is on top, which may not be yours") is a non-obvious operational hazard, not padding — and every table row is a distinct directive, so every token earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is mostly executable: a numbered gate procedure, a claim-to-evidence table, a report template, an executable git diff/apply regression snippet, and a concrete memory command. However `dev-smoke` — the central user-facing verification mechanism — is never given an invocation command, and the Task Tracing section is vague ("run the real read probe first" with no command).

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Gate Function is a sequenced 0-5 process with an explicit failure loop ("If any step fails, stop. Fix the issue and restart from step 0"), and Regression Verification has must-pass/must-fail checkpoints plus a recovery rule ("If step 4 passes, the test is wrong. Rewrite it."), matching the top anchor for explicit validation and feedback loops.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is self-contained with clear, well-ordered section headers and easy navigation, but the ~91-line body exceeds the under-50-lines simple-skill exception and supplementary material (the Red Flags table, Task Tracing) is all inline with no one-level-deep reference split, leaving minor organization gaps.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

78%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong description with an explicit and concrete "Use when..." trigger clause covering the main completion-claim scenarios, and a clear statement of what the skill enforces. Its main gaps are missing common trigger synonyms ("verify", "prove", "done") and listing only a couple of the skill's concrete enforcement actions.

Suggestions

Add natural trigger synonyms such as "verify", "prove it works", or "is it fixed" to the "Use when" clause to broaden natural keyword coverage.

Mention one or two more concrete enforcement actions (e.g., running a verification gate per claim, or regression-testing bug fixes) to raise specificity.

Consider narrowing "completing any task" to completion-reporting moments to reduce overlap with task-specific skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Enforce evidence-based completion claims — require fresh command output before reporting success" names the domain and 1-2 concrete mechanisms, but does not list several distinct specific actions (e.g., running gates, regression verification, smoke tests) that would reach comprehensive coverage.

3 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both "what" ("Enforce evidence-based completion claims — require fresh command output before reporting success") and "when" ("Use when completing any task, fixing a bug... or making any 'it works' claim") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor exactly.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"completing any task, fixing a bug, finishing a phase, running tests, building, deploying, or making any 'it works' claim" gives good natural keyword coverage, but misses common synonyms a user would say such as "verify", "prove it works", "done", or "tests pass".

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The evidence-before-success-claims niche is distinct with specific triggers, but "completing any task" and "running tests, building, deploying" are broad trigger moments that create minor overlap risk with task-specific test/build/deploy skills.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

codeaholicguy/ai-devkit

Path

skills/verify/SKILL.md

Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.