Verification Before Completion

Overview

Core principle: Evidence before claims, always.

The Gate

BEFORE claiming any status:

1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?
2. RUN: Execute the command (fresh, complete)
3. READ: Full output, check exit code
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

Common Failures

Claim	Requires	Not Sufficient
Tests pass	Test command output: 0 failures	Previous run, "should pass"
Linter clean	Linter output: 0 errors	Partial check
Build succeeds	Build command: exit 0	"Looks good"
Bug fixed	Original symptom: gone	Code changed, assumed fixed
Pipeline complete	Output files exist and are valid	Tool reported success
Notebook runs	All cells executed without error	Some cells ran

Red Flags — STOP

If you catch yourself:

• Using "should", "probably", "seems to"
• Expressing satisfaction before verification ("Great!", "Done!")
• About to commit without running tests
• Relying on partial verification
• Trusting a tool's success report without checking output

Rationalizations

Excuse	Reality
"Should work now"	RUN the verification
"I'm confident"	Confidence != evidence
"Just this once"	No exceptions
"Tool said success"	Verify independently
"Partial check is enough"	Partial proves nothing

Key Patterns

Tests:

CORRECT: [Run test] → [See: 34/34 pass] → "All tests pass"
WRONG:   "Should pass now" / "Looks correct"

Pipeline output:

CORRECT: [Check output file exists] → [Verify size/format] → "Pipeline produced valid output"
WRONG:   "Galaxy shows green" (without checking actual data)

Notebook:

CORRECT: [Restart kernel] → [Run All] → [Check no errors] → "Notebook runs cleanly"
WRONG:   "I updated the cell" (without re-running)

The Bottom Line

Run the command. Read the output. THEN claim the result.

Attribution

Adapted from obra/superpowers verification-before-completion skill.