verify-done

verify-done is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from hamr0/liteagents. It costs 42 tokens per session (1,061 once invoked), scanned A, a copy of verification-before-completion, Apache-2.0.

A completion-checking guide for coding agents. It requires fresh command output as evidence before claiming that work is finished, fixed, or passing.

In plain words
What is it for?
Verifying tests, fixes, completed tasks, commits, pushes, and pull requests before reporting success.
Why use it?
Agents can make incorrect completion claims when they rely on an old test run or skip verification. This guide ties each claim to a specific check and its actual result.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/hamr0/liteagents/verify-done
Any agent
npx skills add hamr0/liteagents --skill verify-done
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hamr0/liteagents

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for verify-done

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hamr0/liteagents/verify-done.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/hamr0/liteagents/verify-done)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hamr0/liteagents/verify-done"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hamr0/liteagents/verify-done.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 42 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,061 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin 81% copy Near-identical to another mod in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00042 $0.01061
Opus 5 $0.00021 $0.00531
Sonnet 5 $0.00008 $0.00212
Haiku 4.5 $0.00004 $0.00106

Measured 4d ago against content hash 7fec2561dfa3, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

verify-done scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 4d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

Origin

This is a copy

81% identical to verification-before-completion — 36 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.

packages/claude/skills/verify-done/SKILL.md · 153 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 153 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Verify Done

Auto-Trigger

APPLIES WHEN:

  • About to say: done, fixed, complete, passing, success
  • About to commit, push, create PR
  • About to mark task [x]

APPLIES TO: All agents, all invocation paths

NEVER SKIP: Even for "obvious" tasks

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 Linter output: 0 errors Partial check, extrapolation
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

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

Read the full file on GitHub · 153 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 4d ago First seen · 153 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A 7fec2561dfa3

Subscribe to this mod's changes

verify-done is a skill published in the GitHub repository hamr0/liteagents (22 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 1,061 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 81% identical to verification-before-completion, differing in 36 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

dingtalk_channel_connect

Use a headed browser to automatically complete DingTalk channel integration for QwenPaw. Applicable when the user mentions DingTalk, developer console, Client ID, Client Secret, bot, Stream mode, binding or configuring a channel. Supports pausing when a login page is detected and resuming after the user logs in.

agentscope-ai/QwenPaw · 69 tokens

pdf

当用户需要对PDF文件进行任何操作时,请使用此技能。包括从 PDF 中读取或提取文本/表格、合并多个 PDF、拆分 PDF、旋转页面、添加水印、创建新PDF、填写PDF表单、加密/解密 PDF、提取图片,以及对扫描版 PDF 进行 OCR 使其可搜索。如果用户提到 .pdf 文件或要求生成 PDF,请使用此技能。.

agentscope-ai/QwenPaw · 95 tokens

make_plan

For external plan request scenarios, guides the Agent to request a clear, actionable, step-by-step plan from a stronger Agent via listagents and chatwithagent, emphasizing that the plan is executed by the requester, not by the consulted Agent.

agentscope-ai/QwenPaw · 51 tokens

peer-review

Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating…

xintaofei/codeg · 71 tokens

scientific-critical-thinking

Evaluate scientific claims and evidence quality. Use for assessing experimental design validity, identifying biases and confounders, applying evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), or teaching critical analysis. Best for understanding evidence quality, identifying flaws. For formal peer review…

xintaofei/codeg · 63 tokens

statistical-power

Sample-size and statistical power calculations for planning studies. Use whenever someone asks "how many subjects/samples/replicates do I need", wants an a priori power analysis, a minimum detectable effect (MDE), a power curve, or needs to justify a sample size for a grant, IRB protocol, or pre-registration. Covers…

xintaofei/codeg · 190 tokens