proof-of-work
$
npx mdskill add TheBushidoCollective/han/proof-of-workVerify code claims with concrete tool output evidence.
- Ensures test and build assertions include actual command results.
- Depends on Write, Edit, Read, Bash, and Grep tools.
- Executes verification steps before accepting any quality claim.
- Displays raw tool output to prove file changes occurred.
SKILL.md
.github/skills/proof-of-workView on GitHub ↗
--- name: proof-of-work user-invocable: false description: Use automatically during development workflows when making claims about tests, builds, verification, or code quality requiring concrete evidence to ensure trust through transparency. allowed-tools: - Write - Edit - Read - Bash - Grep --- # Proof of Work **Show, don't tell.** Never make claims about code verification without providing concrete evidence. ## Core Principle **Trust through transparency.** Every assertion about code quality, test results, builds, or verification must be backed by actual command output, not summaries or assumptions. ## Implementation Proof When implementing features: 1. **USE Write/Edit tools to make changes** - Never just describe what should be written - Actually call Write tool to create files - Actually call Edit tool to modify files 2. **Show tool results** - After Write: "Successfully wrote /path/to/file.ex" - After Edit: "Successfully edited /path/to/file.ex" - Tool output is proof changes were made 3. **Verify changes exist** - Use Bash to verify files exist: `ls -la /path/to/file.ex` - Use Read to show content if needed - Actual file existence is proof **Remember**: If you didn't use Write/Edit tools, it didn't happen. ## Agent Verification (CRITICAL) **NEVER EVER trust agent completion reports without verification.** This is a **zero-tolerance rule**. Agent reports are NOT proof - they are **claims requiring verification**. ### The Critical Error When you delegate work to a subagent: 1. Agent completes and reports "Successfully created X, modified Y, implementation complete" 2. **STOP - DO NOT TRUST THIS REPORT** 3. Agent reports mean NOTHING until you verify 4. Blindly trusting agent reports is a **catastrophic failure** ### Mandatory Verification After EVERY Agent **After ANY agent completes, you MUST verify work was actually done:** ```bash # 1. Verify files were actually modified git status --short # 2. Verify actual changes exist git diff --name-only # 3. Verify specific file exists (if agent claimed to create it) ls -la /path/to/file # 4. Verify file content (spot check) cat /path/to/file | head -20 ``` **If git status shows clean working tree → NOTHING was done, regardless of agent report.** ### Red Flags in Agent Reports ### Never trust these claims without verification | Agent Claim | Required Verification | | ------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- | | "Successfully created X" | `ls -la /path/to/X` - prove file exists | | "Modified files A, B, C" | `git status` - prove files show as modified | | "Changes made to Y" | `git diff Y` - prove actual changes exist | | "Implementation complete" | `git diff --stat` - prove work was done | | "Added tests to Z" | `cat Z` - prove tests actually exist | | "Updated configuration" | `git diff config/` - prove config changed | ### Verification Workflow (MANDATORY) ```text 1. Delegate to agent 2. Agent reports completion 3. ⚠️ STOP - DO NOT TRUST REPORT ⚠️ 4. Run verification commands (git status, ls, cat, etc.) 5. If verification fails → Agent did NOT complete work 6. If verification passes → THEN report to user WITH PROOF ``` ### Evidence Requirements for Agent Work **❌ NEVER report to user:** - "Agent created X" (without proving X exists) - "Agent modified Y" (without showing git diff) - "Implementation complete" (without showing git status) - "Tests added" (without proving tests exist) **✅ ALWAYS report with proof:** ```bash # After agent completes, verify: $ git status --short M apps/api/lib/users/worker.ex A apps/api/test/users/worker_test.exs # Prove files exist: $ ls -la apps/api/test/users/worker_test.exs -rw-r--r-- 1 user staff 2847 Nov 7 14:32 apps/api/test/users/worker_test.exs # Spot check content: $ head -10 apps/api/test/users/worker_test.exs defmodule YourApp.Users.UserTest do use YourApp.DataCase ... ``` **Then report:** "Agent completed. Verification proves 2 files modified (evidence above)." ### Why This Matters ### Failure to verify agent work - Destroys user trust - Wastes user time - Results in false claims - Violates proof-of-work principle - Is a **catastrophic error** **The user must be able to trust your reports.** Agent reports without verification are **worthless**. ### Agent Verification Remember - **Agent reports are claims, not proof** - **Verification is MANDATORY after EVERY agent** - **If you didn't verify, you don't know if it happened** - **Git status is ground truth, not agent reports** - **Never report agent completion without showing verification** **This is non-negotiable.** Failure to verify agent work is unacceptable. ## When to Apply Apply this skill whenever claiming: - Tests pass/fail - Build succeeds/fails - Linting clean/has issues - Types check - GraphQL compatibility verified - CI pipeline status - Code review findings - Performance metrics - Any verifiable development assertion ## Evidence Requirements **❌ Never say without proof:** - "Tests pass" / "Build succeeds" / "No linting issues" - "Types check" / "Pipeline is green" / "Code is clean" **✅ Always provide actual output:** ```bash # Tests $ mix test Finished in 42.3 seconds 1,247 tests, 0 failures # Linting $ MIX_ENV=test mix lint Running Credo... ✓ No issues found. # Types $ yarn ts:check ✓ 456 files checked, 0 errors # CI Pipeline $ glab ci status Pipeline #12345: passed ✓ URL: https://gitlab.com/.../pipelines/12345 ``` ## Zero Tolerance for Assumptions ### Never assume or claim without running ❌ **WRONG:** - "The tests should pass" - "This probably works" - "Based on my changes, tests will pass" - "I expect the build succeeds" ✅ **RIGHT:** - "I have not run the tests yet. Let me run them now." - "Running `mix test` to verify..." - [Shows complete output] ## Partial Verification Is Not Verification **❌ NEVER claim success from partial runs:** ```bash # Only ran 50 tests of 1,247 Running ExUnit tests... 50 tests, 0 failures # STOPPED HERE - did not complete ``` "Tests pass" ❌ **FALSE - only partial run** **✅ ALWAYS run to completion:** ```bash # Full suite completed Finished in 42.3 seconds 1,247 tests, 0 failures # ALL tests ran ``` "Full test suite passes: 1,247 tests, 0 failures" ✅ **TRUE** ## Output Format 1. Show the command you ran 2. Show results, not summaries 3. Include counts (tests, files, errors) 4. Include URLs for CI/remote resources ## Complete Verification Example ```bash $ MIX_ENV=test mix lint ✓ No issues found. $ mix test 1,247 tests, 0 failures $ yarn graphql:compat ✓ No breaking changes $ glab ci status Pipeline #12345: passed ✓ ``` **Then claim:** "All verification passed (evidence above)." ## Red Flags Stop and provide proof if you catch yourself saying: - "Tests pass" (without showing output) - "Build works" (without showing build log) - "No errors" (without showing check results) - "Pipeline is green" (without showing pipeline status) - "Code is clean" (without showing lint output) - "Types check" (without showing tsc output) ## Workflow Integration **Implementation:** Run verification → Show complete output → Report with evidence → Wait for approval **Code review:** Reference line numbers (`file.ts:123`), quote issues, show analyzer output **Debugging:** Show full errors, stack traces, reproduction steps with output ## Remember - **Every claim needs proof** - No exceptions - **Show complete output** - No summaries or excerpts for verification - **Run commands yourself** - Never assume or infer results - **Timestamps matter** - Show when verification ran - **Links are proof** - Provide URLs for remote resources - **Honesty over convenience** - Admit when you haven't verified ### Transparency builds trust. Evidence eliminates doubt
More from TheBushidoCollective/han
- absinthe-resolversUse when implementing GraphQL resolvers with Absinthe. Covers resolver patterns, dataloader integration, batching, and error handling.
- absinthe-schemaUse when designing GraphQL schemas with Absinthe. Covers type definitions, interfaces, unions, enums, and schema organization patterns.
- absinthe-subscriptionsUse when implementing real-time GraphQL subscriptions with Absinthe. Covers Phoenix channels, PubSub, and subscription patterns.
- act-docker-setupUse when configuring Docker environments for act, selecting runner images, managing container resources, or troubleshooting Docker-related issues with local GitHub Actions testing.
- act-local-testingUse when testing GitHub Actions workflows locally with act. Covers act CLI usage, Docker configuration, debugging workflows, and troubleshooting common issues when running workflows on your local machine.
- act-workflow-syntaxUse when creating or modifying GitHub Actions workflow files. Provides guidance on workflow syntax, triggers, jobs, steps, and expressions for creating valid GitHub Actions workflows that can be tested locally with act.
- ameba-configurationUse when configuring Ameba rules and settings for Crystal projects including .ameba.yml setup, rule management, severity levels, and code quality enforcement.
- ameba-custom-rulesUse when creating custom Ameba rules for Crystal code analysis including rule development, AST traversal, issue reporting, and rule testing.
- ameba-integrationUse when integrating Ameba into development workflows including CI/CD pipelines, pre-commit hooks, GitHub Actions, and automated code review processes.
- analyze-performanceAnalyze performance metrics and identify slow transactions in Sentry