skills/ryanthedev/code-foundations/aposd-verifying-correctness

aposd-verifying-correctness

SKILL.md

Skill: aposd-verifying-correctness

STOP - Before "Done"

Design quality ≠ correctness. Well-designed code can still have bugs, missing requirements, or safety issues.

Run ALL dimension checks before claiming done. "I think I covered everything" without explicit mapping is a red flag.


Dimension Detection & Checks

For each dimension: detect if it applies, then verify.


1. Requirements Coverage

Detect: Were requirements stated? (explicit list, user request, spec)

If YES, verify:

  • List each requirement explicitly
  • For each: point to code that implements it
  • Any requirement without code? → Not done
  • Any code without requirement? → Scope creep or missing requirement

Red flag: "I think I covered everything" without explicit mapping


2. Concurrency Safety

Detect: Any of these present?

  • Multiple threads/processes accessing same data
  • Async/await patterns
  • Shared mutable state (class attributes, globals)
  • "Thread-safe" in requirements or docstring
  • Web handlers, queue workers, background tasks

If YES, verify:

  • All shared mutable state identified
  • Each access point protected (lock, atomic, queue, immutable)
  • No time-of-check to time-of-use (TOCTOU) gaps
  • Lock ordering consistent (if multiple locks)

Red flag: "It's probably fine" or "Python GIL handles it"


3. Error Handling

Detect: Can any operation fail?

  • I/O (file, network, database)
  • External calls (APIs, subprocesses)
  • Resource acquisition (memory, connections)
  • User input processing
  • Parsing/deserialization

If YES, verify:

  • Each failure point has explicit handling OR propagates
  • No bare except: or except Exception: pass
  • Error messages actionable (what failed, why, how to fix)
  • Partial failures handled (rollback, cleanup, consistent state)

Red flag: "Errors are rare" or "caller handles it" without checking caller


4. Resource Management

Detect: Does code acquire resources?

  • File handles, sockets, connections
  • Locks, semaphores
  • Memory allocations (large buffers, caches)
  • External service handles
  • Background threads/processes

If YES, verify:

  • Every acquire has corresponding release
  • Release happens in finally/context manager/destructor
  • Release happens on error paths too
  • No resource leaks on repeated calls
  • Bounded growth (caches have limits, queues have limits)

Red flag: "It cleans up eventually" or daemon threads without shutdown


5. Boundary Conditions

Detect: Does code handle variable-size input?

  • Collections (lists, dicts, sets)
  • Strings, byte arrays
  • Numeric ranges
  • Optional/nullable values

If YES, verify:

  • Empty input: What happens with [], "", None, 0?
  • Single item: Edge case often different from N items
  • Maximum size: What if input is huge? Memory? Time?
  • Invalid values: Negative numbers, NaN, special characters?
  • Type boundaries: int overflow, float precision?

Red flag: "Nobody would pass that" or "that's an edge case"


6. Security (if applicable)

Detect: Does code handle untrusted input?

  • User-provided data (forms, API requests)
  • File contents from external sources
  • URLs, paths, identifiers from users
  • Data that becomes SQL, shell, HTML, or code

If YES, verify:

  • Input validated before use
  • No string concatenation for SQL/shell/HTML (use parameterized)
  • Path traversal prevented (no ../ exploitation)
  • Secrets not logged or exposed in errors
  • Auth/authz checked before action, not after

Red flag: "It's internal only" (internals get exposed)


Quick Checklist (Minimum)

Before "done", answer YES to all that apply:

Dimension Detection Trigger Verified?
Requirements Requirements were stated [ ] Each mapped to code
Concurrency Shared state exists [ ] All access protected
Errors Operations can fail [ ] All failures handled
Resources Resources acquired [ ] All released (incl. errors)
Boundaries Variable-size input [ ] Edge cases handled
Security Untrusted input [ ] Input validated

Anti-Rationalization Table

Thought Reality
"Design is good, so it works" Design ≠ correctness. Check anyway.
"It's simple code" Simple code has bugs too. Check anyway.
"I'll add error handling later" Later = never. Check now.
"Edge cases are rare" Edge cases cause production incidents.
"It's not user-facing" Internal code gets exposed. Check anyway.
"Tests will catch it" Tests check what you wrote, not what you missed.

Output Format

When verifying, output:

## Correctness Verification

### Requirements: [PASS/FAIL/N/A]
- Requirement 1 → implemented in X
- Requirement 2 → implemented in Y

### Concurrency: [PASS/FAIL/N/A]
- Shared state: [list]
- Protection: [how]

### Errors: [PASS/FAIL/N/A]
- Failure points: [list]
- Handling: [approach]

### Resources: [PASS/FAIL/N/A]
- Acquired: [list]
- Released: [how]

### Boundaries: [PASS/FAIL/N/A]
- Edge cases: [list]
- Handling: [approach]

### Security: [PASS/FAIL/N/A]
- Untrusted input: [list]
- Validation: [approach]

**Verdict:** [DONE / NOT DONE - list blockers]

Relationship to Other Skills

Skill Focus When
aposd-designing-deep-modules Design quality FIRST—during design
aposd-maintaining-design-quality Design philosophy During modification
aposd-verifying-correctness Actual correctness BEFORE "done"
cc-quality-practices Testing/debugging Throughout

Order: Design → Implement → Verify (this skill) → Done


Chain

After Next
All dimensions pass Done (pre-commit gate)
Weekly Installs
1
GitHub Stars
154
First Seen
7 days ago
Installed on
amp1
cline1
opencode1
cursor1
kimi-cli1
codex1