Verification Before Completion
Overview
Claiming work is complete without verification is dishonesty, not efficiency.
Core principle: Evidence before claims, always.
Violating the letter of this rule is violating the spirit of this rule.
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE
If you haven't run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.
The Gate Function
BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:
1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?
2. RUN: Execute the FULL command (fresh, complete)
3. READ: Full output, check exit code, count failures
4. VERIFY: Does output confirm the claim?
- If NO: State actual status with evidence
- If YES: State claim WITH evidence
5. ONLY THEN: Make the claim
Skip any step = lying, not verifying
Common Failures
| Claim | Requires | Not Sufficient |
|---|---|---|
| Tests pass | Test command output: 0 failures | Previous run, "should pass" |
| Linter clean | pnpm lint:fix output: 0 errors | Partial check, extrapolation |
| Format clean | pnpm format output: no changes | Visual inspection, assumption |
| Build succeeds | Build command: exit 0 | Linter passing, logs look good |
| Bug fixed | Test original symptom: passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |
| Regression test works | Red-green cycle verified | Test passes once |
| Agent completed | VCS diff shows changes | Agent reports "success" |
| Requirements met | Line-by-line checklist | Tests passing |
| Code quality gates | pnpm lint:fix + pnpm format passed | Tests passing |
Red Flags - STOP
- Using "should", "probably", "seems to"
- Expressing satisfaction before verification ("Great!", "Perfect!", "Done!", etc.)
- About to commit/push/PR without verification
- Trusting agent success reports
- Relying on partial verification
- Thinking "just this once"
- Tired and wanting work over
- ANY wording implying success without having run verification
Rationalization Prevention
| Excuse | Reality |
|---|---|
| "Should work now" | RUN the verification |
| "I'm confident" | Confidence does not equal evidence |
| "Just this once" | No exceptions |
| "Linter passed" | Linter does not equal compiler |
| "Agent said success" | Verify independently |
| "I'm tired" | Exhaustion does not equal excuse |
| "Partial check is enough" | Partial proves nothing |
| "Different words so rule doesn't apply" | Spirit over letter |
Key Patterns
Tests:
CORRECT: [Run test command] [See: 34/34 pass] "All tests pass"
WRONG: "Should pass now" / "Looks correct"
Regression tests (TDD Red-Green):
CORRECT: Write -> Run (pass) -> Revert fix -> Run (MUST FAIL) -> Restore -> Run (pass)
WRONG: "I've written a regression test" (without red-green verification)
Build:
CORRECT: [Run build] [See: exit 0] "Build passes"
WRONG: "Linter passed" (linter doesn't check compilation)
Lint and Format (BLOCKING GATE):
CORRECT: [Run pnpm lint:fix] [See: 0 errors] [Run pnpm format] [See: no changes] "Lint and format clean"
WRONG: "Code looks formatted" / "No obvious lint issues" / "Should be clean"
Requirements:
CORRECT: Re-read plan -> Create checklist -> Verify each -> Report gaps or completion
WRONG: "Tests pass, phase complete"
Agent delegation:
CORRECT: Agent reports success -> Check VCS diff -> Verify changes -> Report actual state
WRONG: Trust agent report
Why This Matters
From failure analysis:
- "I don't believe you" - trust broken
- Undefined functions shipped - would crash
- Missing requirements shipped - incomplete features
- Time wasted on false completion -> redirect -> rework
- Violates: "Honesty is a core value. If you lie, you'll be replaced."
When To Apply
ALWAYS before:
- ANY variation of success/completion claims
- ANY expression of satisfaction
- ANY positive statement about work state
- Committing, PR creation, task completion
- Moving to next task
- Delegating to agents
Rule applies to:
- Exact phrases
- Paraphrases and synonyms
- Implications of success
- ANY communication suggesting completion/correctness
The Bottom Line
No shortcuts for verification.
Run the command. Read the output. THEN claim the result.
This is non-negotiable.
Iron Laws
- NEVER claim task completion without running fresh verification commands in the current session
- ALWAYS read the full command output before asserting a result — not just the last line or exit code
- NEVER use hedging language ("should pass", "probably works") as a substitute for running verification
- ALWAYS apply the red-green-refactor cycle: verify test fails, fix passes, revert fails again
- NEVER commit, push, or close a task without verified evidence that all gates (tests, lint, format) pass
Anti-Patterns
| Anti-Pattern | Why It Fails | Correct Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Claiming success before running commands | No evidence the claim is true | Run the command, read full output, then claim |
| Trusting results from a prior run | State may have changed since last execution | Always run fresh verification in the current session |
| Partial verification (tests but not lint) | Lint failures fail CI even when tests pass | Run all gates: tests, pnpm lint:fix, pnpm format |
| Using "should" or "probably" language | Implies assumption, not verification | Eliminate hedging; verify then state the fact |
| Skipping red-green-refactor cycle | Regression tests that always pass catch nothing | Verify test fails on revert before marking complete |
Memory Protocol (MANDATORY)
Before starting:
Read .claude/context/memory/learnings.md
After completing:
- New pattern ->
.claude/context/memory/learnings.md - Issue found ->
.claude/context/memory/issues.md - Decision made ->
.claude/context/memory/decisions.md
ASSUME INTERRUPTION: If it's not in memory, it didn't happen.