Perform a structured check of your work to ensure it meets requirements before final submission.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/verify-cwinvestments && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/10986" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/verify-cwinvestments && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/verify-cwinvestments
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Use when the user says 'verify', 'check this work', 'does it pass', or before committing completed work.Key capabilities
- →Runs automated build checks
- →Executes test suites
- →Performs manual requirement validation
- →Scans for common code issues
How it works
It runs a mandatory protocol of automated and manual checks to ensure work meets requirements before committing.
Inputs & outputs
When to use verify
- →Verifying task completion
- →Checking work before commit
- →Ensuring requirements are met
About this skill
✅ Verify — Checking Work...
Review completed work against requirements before committing.
Activation
When this skill activates, output:
✅ Verify — Checking work against requirements...
Then execute the protocol below.
Context Guard
| Context | Status | Priority |
|---|---|---|
| User says "verify", "check this work", "does it pass" | ACTIVE — run verification | P1 |
| User says "is this done", "ready to commit" | ACTIVE — run verification | P1 |
| User is mid-task, still actively coding | DORMANT — let them finish first | — |
| User asks to commit or push | DORMANT — Seal hook handles pre-push checks | — |
| User asks to review someone else's code | DORMANT — not a code review tool | — |
Anti-Rationalization
If you're thinking any of these, STOP — you're about to skip the protocol:
| You're thinking... | Reality |
|---|---|
| "I already tested this manually" | Ad-hoc testing leaves no record. Run the automated checks. |
| "This change is too small to verify" | Small changes cause regressions. Run the full protocol. |
| "The build passed, so it's fine" | Build passing ≠ requirements met. Always do the manual requirement check (Step 3). |
| "I'll just commit and fix issues later" | Issues found after commit are 10x harder to fix. Verify first. |
| "There are no tests for this project" | Skip automated tests, but ALWAYS do the manual requirement check and common issues scan. |
| "The user seems in a hurry" | Shipping broken code wastes more time than verification takes. |
Protocol
Step 1: Identify the Task
Determine what was being built by checking:
- Recent conversation context (what the user asked for)
- Git diff for uncommitted changes
- Recent commits if already committed
Summarize: "Task: [what was being built/changed]"
Step 2: Run Automated Checks
Run whatever applies to the current project:
Build check:
# Detect and run the project's build command
npm run build # Node.js
make build # Makefile
python -m py_compile <file> # Python
Test check:
# Detect and run the project's test command
npm test # Node.js
pytest # Python
make test # Makefile
Lint check (if available):
npm run lint # Node.js
If no build/test tooling exists, skip and note "No automated checks configured."
Step 3: Manual Requirement Check
Compare the completed work against the original requirements:
- List each requirement from the original task
- Check whether it was implemented
- Flag any gaps, missing edge cases, or regressions
Step 4: Check for Common Issues
- Uncommitted debug code:
console.log,print(),debugger,TODOmarkers left behind - Hardcoded values: Magic numbers, hardcoded URLs, temp credentials
- Missing error handling: Unhandled promises, missing try/catch at boundaries
- Incomplete cleanup: Unused imports, dead code from earlier attempts
Step 5: Generate Report
## Verification Report
*{YYYY-MM-DD}*
### Task: {what was being built}
### Automated Checks
- [x] Build: passes / [ ] fails — {error}
- [x] Tests: passes / [ ] fails — {error}
- [x] Lint: passes / [ ] N/A
### Requirements
- [x] {Requirement 1} — implemented in {file}
- [x] {Requirement 2} — implemented in {file}
- [ ] {Requirement 3} — MISSING: {what's needed}
### Issues Found
1. {Issue} → {Suggested fix}
### Verdict: PASS / NEEDS FIX
Step 6: Recommend Action
- PASS: "Looks good. Ready to commit."
- NEEDS FIX: List specific fixes needed, prioritized by severity.
Inputs
- Current working context (project, recent changes)
- Original task requirements (from conversation or plan)
- Git diff / status for change analysis
Outputs
- Verification report with pass/fail checklist
- Specific fix recommendations if issues found
Example Usage
User: "verify this work"
✅ Verify — Checking work against requirements...
## Verification Report
Task: Add user registration API endpoint
### Automated Checks
- [x] Build: passes
- [x] Tests: 14/14 passing
- [x] Lint: clean
### Requirements
- [x] POST /api/register endpoint — server/routes/auth.ts
- [x] Email validation — uses zod schema
- [x] Password hashing — bcrypt with salt rounds=12
- [ ] Rate limiting — MISSING: no rate limiter on registration endpoint
### Issues Found
1. No rate limiting on /api/register → Add express-rate-limit middleware
### Verdict: NEEDS FIX (1 issue)
Level History
- Lv.1 — Base: Pre-commit verification with automated + manual checks, structured report output, framework-agnostic detection. (Origin: MemStack v3.1, Feb 2026)
When not to use it
- →When the user is mid-task
- →When the project lacks build/test tooling
Limitations
- →Requires project-specific tooling
- →Not a code review tool
How it compares
It enforces a structured verification protocol rather than relying on ad-hoc testing.
Compared to similar skills
verify side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| verify (this skill) | 0 | 4mo | Review | Intermediate |
| python-testing-patterns | 77 | 2mo | Review | Intermediate |
| dependency-upgrade | 26 | 5mo | Review | Intermediate |
| test-cases | 57 | 7mo | No flags | Beginner |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
More by cwinvestments
View all by cwinvestments →You might also like
python-testing-patterns
wshobson
Implement comprehensive testing strategies with pytest, fixtures, mocking, and test-driven development. Use when writing Python tests, setting up test suites, or implementing testing best practices.
dependency-upgrade
wshobson
Manage major dependency version upgrades with compatibility analysis, staged rollout, and comprehensive testing. Use when upgrading framework versions, updating major dependencies, or managing breaking changes in libraries.
test-cases
cexll
This skill should be used when generating comprehensive test cases from PRD documents or user requirements. Triggers when users request test case generation, QA planning, test scenario creation, or need structured test documentation. Produces detailed test cases covering functional, edge case, error handling, and state transition scenarios.
reviewing-code
CaptainCrouton89
Systematically evaluate code changes for security, correctness, performance, and spec alignment. Use when reviewing PRs, assessing code quality, or verifying implementation against requirements.
wcag-audit-patterns
wshobson
Conduct WCAG 2.2 accessibility audits with automated testing, manual verification, and remediation guidance. Use when auditing websites for accessibility, fixing WCAG violations, or implementing accessible design patterns.
code-coverage-with-gcov
gadievron
Add gcov code coverage instrumentation to C/C++ projects