Verification Before Completion

What the source does

• FilesystemNone observedNo reads or writes in the source
• NetworkNone observedNo outbound calls in the source
• ShellNone observedNo commands run in the source
• DependenciesPinnedNothing floats
• SecretsNone foundNo keys in source

Five audit layers

Gates applied: no behavioural pass.

Audit 0.4.1 · source sha 177240a262fe · 18 Oct 2026Report an issue or request a re-scan

• PublisherGanyuanRan GitHub userOwner of the repository this skill is read from
• Source folderGanyuanRan/Aegis/skills/verification-before-completionThe exact folder we audited
• LicenceMITAs the repository states it
• Commit pinned for this verdict177240a262feA new audit runs when the source changes
• Repository statusNot archivedPushed today
• Sandboxed runNot runSkills are read, not executed; layer L4 is skipped

Its description: Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, passing, verified, release-ready, or ready to commit, merge, publish, or hand off.

---
name: verification-before-completion
description: "Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, passing, verified, release-ready, or ready to commit, merge, publish, or hand off."
---

<EXPLICIT-MODE-GATE>
If `activation_mode = "explicit"` or `AEGIS_ACTIVATION_MODE=explicit` is visible
and the request names neither Aegis nor this skill, return to the fast path
without checklist/ceremony; otherwise continue.
</EXPLICIT-MODE-GATE>

# Execute

Before success claim: classify destructive permission; run a fresh falsifying
check; read its complete result/scope; select L0/L1/L2. Downgrade for partial,
stale, failing, or narrower evidence; never claim complete then verify later.

This Method Pack grants no authoritative `GateDecision`, `PolicySnapshot`,
evidence sufficiency, requirement acceptance, or completion authority.

## Stop Signals

- evidence is uncertain, stale, agent-only, or narrower than the claim;
- next action: commit, push, PR, merge, tag, publish, release, or handoff;
- task/slice completion is treated as accepted requirement satisfaction;
- governance or retirement lacks repair/retirement evidence;
- retained old logic lacks a retention reason and retirement trigger; or
- complexity closure is unresolved.

Destructive/irreversible work needs scoped permission; broad assent is not scoped permission.

## Required Evidence Slots

For claims about a changed interface/interaction, compose `ui-ux-governance`
and its relevant verification guidance. Carry actual results and uncovered
user-facing criteria into the slots below; retain this single closeout owner.

```text
- Evidence action / check performed:
- Result / exit status:
- Covered scope:
- Uncovered scope:
- Residual risk:
- Confidence grade: A | B | C
```

- `A`: target + regression; no meaningful unknown.
- `B`: target evidence; bounded residual risk.
- `C`: partial only; no full-completion claim.

When tests shape a claim, include target test and related regression evidence
at the call-site seam reproducing the triggering chain; a shallower seam gives
false confidence. Missing seam is an architecture gap. Blocked automation needs
reproducible manual steps. Both lower confidence.

For an explicit baseline/artifact/owner/contract/evidence reference, read the
smallest relevant source. Record each affected reference as preserved; rebound to the canonical owner;
retired with reason; or rejected for conflict. Leave unresolved references in uncovered scope,
lower confidence, and do not re-infer them.
Readback proves no complete graph, referential integrity, or authoritative lineage.

## Inherited-Claim Closeout

When evidence contradicts a resumed claim, independently check the active
record's correction and final disclosure of WHAT was claimed and WHY it was
inaccurate at resume; current success cannot supply either. Preserve subject,
scope and time; one explanation may cover related claims. Read both in full
for example-only, negated, withdrawn or re-scoped corrections. Matching quotes
do not prove adoption. Keep accurate claims intact. If material disagreement
about the initial judgment remains unresolved after checking evidence, state
`needs-verification`; never force agreement with a reviewer. If evidence resolves
it, retain the supported conclusion and verify normally. Omit this slot when
no discrepancy exists.

## Task Git Closeout

For modifications, diff against `TaskStartSnapshot`. Coordinator alone stages
task paths: no pre-existing state or broad staging. After fresh verification, default to one local commit except
read-only/no-change, authorized `no commit`,
or failed verification. Read back `HEAD`, message, files, and task delta.
Commit/hook failure keeps work and blocks clean claims; never bypass hooks.

Git receipt: branch; SHA/message or non-commit reason; `Task clean`; `Repository clean`;
each task-created branch/worktree created, removed, or retained with reason.
Task-clean never implies repo-clean; it is not external integration.

Classify commit scope: `business`, `process-only`, `mixed`, or `no-commit`.
Failed-attempt telemetry is no commit reason. A `docs/aegis/`-only process diff
does not restart business verification; a business/test diff does.

## Aegis Visibility / Single Closeout

Use one completion surface. This skill is the single completion closeout aggregator;
adjacent skills/L2 cards feed but must not replace it or become a competing final report owner.
Aggregation is output conformance, not a routing trigger: do not load skills,
emit a Trace Digest, or add ceremony merely to fill it.

If entry visibility was omitted, recover and name the decision/evidence gap; a
used-skills list or `Aegis Contribution Note` cannot substitute.

## L0 Fast-Path

For tiny low-risk work, one natural sentence can name check/result, uncovered
scope/risk, and confidence.

## L1 Default Receipt

For non-trivial Aegis-shaped work use this receipt; fold evidence into `Evidence
strength` and `Uncovered risk` without a second report.

```text
Aegis Impact and Safety Receipt:
- Key judgment:
- Avoided misfix:
- Boundary held:
- Baseline alignment:
- Complexity control:
- Evidence strength:
- Uncovered risk:
- Next most valuable verification:
- Aegis path:
```

Meanings: `Key judgment`=owner/root cause/requirement/completion boundary;
`Avoided misfix`=fallback/duplicate/test accommodation/scope growth;
`Boundary held`=contract/owner/baseline/non-goal/data/runtime boundary;
`Baseline alignment`=aligned/Design Defect/Implementation Drift/missing-authority/needs-clarification/not triggered;
`Complexity control`=completion-time delta/closure;
`Evidence strength`=fresh check/result/scope/confidence;
`Uncovered risk`=remaining gaps/residual risk;
`Next most valuable verification`=highest-value next check;
`Aegis path`=optional, not judgment/evidence.

Natural wording is valid when every semantic slot stays auditable. `Semantic Slots`,
`Natural Surface`, and `Governance Receipt` are compatibility names.

Report done/verified/ri

Excerpt, first 6,000 characters of SKILL.md, verbatim from the audited commit. It is text from someone else’s repository, quoted so you can judge it before your agent reads it.

git clone https://github.com/GanyuanRan/Aegis
git -C Aegis checkout 177240a262fe

Works in

1. 2026-10-18
   ✓SAFE B 89 / 100

   first audit · source 177240a262fe

Questions about Verification Before Completion

• github.com/GanyuanRan/Aegis/tree/main/skills/verification-before — the audited source at commit 177240a262fe and every finding aboveObserved · 18 Oct 2026

Spotted something wrong? Report a correction · Methodology