verify-before-complete

verify-before-complete is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from open-gsd/gsd-pi. It costs 92 tokens per session (1,259 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A verification helper that requires fresh evidence before claiming a task, change, commit, pull request, build, or test run is complete.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it before marking work done, committing code, opening a pull request, or reporting that a build, test, lint check, or fix succeeded.
Why use it?
It reduces false completion claims, such as saying tests pass based on an old result or without checking the relevant command. The work must be checked after the latest changes.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one.

Good fit Use it before marking work done, committing code, opening a pull request, or reporting that a build, test, lint check, or fix succeeded.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/open-gsd/gsd-pi/verify-before-complete
About the project

GSD Pi is a command-line coding agent and project workflow system that plans, implements, verifies, and tracks software work through milestones, tasks, Git worktrees, and stored project notes. It is for developers who want structured, longer-running agent sessions using different model providers. The catalogue entries extend GSD Pi with skills and agents.

open-gsd/gsd-pi · 1,205 stars · on GitHub · opengsd.net

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.

Any agent
npx skills add open-gsd/gsd-pi --skill verify-before-complete
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/open-gsd/gsd-pi

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-before-complete

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/open-gsd/gsd-pi/verify-before-complete.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/open-gsd/gsd-pi/verify-before-complete)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/open-gsd/gsd-pi/verify-before-complete"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/open-gsd/gsd-pi/verify-before-complete.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 92 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,259 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to medium

These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →

  • medium Excessive Agency · line 8
    Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.
    Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
  • medium Excessive Agency · line 52
    Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.
    Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found 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 5.1 $0.00092 $0.01259
Opus 5 $0.00046 $0.00629
Sonnet 5 $0.00018 $0.00252
Haiku 4.5 $0.00009 $0.00126

Measured 4d ago against content hash bb91ccba0fcb, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

verify-before-complete 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.

src/resources/skills/verify-before-complete/SKILL.md · 99 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Invocation points:

  • About to toggle a checkbox from [ ] to [x] via a gsd_* tool
  • About to commit, push, or open a PR
  • About to summarize a task or slice as complete
  • About to say "tests pass", "build works", "lint clean", "fixed", "done"
  • Replying to a user question with "yes it works" or similar

<core_principle> EVIDENCE BEFORE CLAIMS, ALWAYS. "I ran it earlier" is not evidence. A log from three tool calls ago is not evidence if code has changed since. The verification must have happened after the last code change, in this message, with fresh output.

VIOLATING THE LETTER IS VIOLATING THE SPIRIT. If the principle feels inconvenient, that is the signal it is load-bearing. Find the verification command. Run it. Read the output. </core_principle>

Step 1: Identify the claim

What are you about to claim? Name it precisely:

  • "Tests pass" → which tests?
  • "Build works" → for which target?
  • "Bug is fixed" → which reproduction?
  • "Task complete" → which acceptance criteria?

Step 2: Identify the verification command

Match claim → command:

Claim Verification
Tests pass The specific test command the project uses (npm test, cargo test, pytest, etc.) — scoped to changed code if large suite.
Build works The project's build command, for real — not tsc --noEmit if the project needs a bundle.
Lint clean lsp diagnostics on edited files, plus the project's linter if CI runs one.
Bug fixed The reproduction steps from the bug report or test, freshly run.
UI works Browser verification via browser_snapshot_refs + browser_assert in a running app — not "it looks right in the diff".
Slice complete Every acceptance criterion in S##-PLAN.md, re-checked against live behavior.

Read the full file on GitHub · 99 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 · 99 lines · 92 tokens per session scan A bb91ccba0fcb

Subscribe to this mod's changes

verify-before-complete is a skill published in the GitHub repository open-gsd/gsd-pi (1,205 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 92 tokens to every session and 1,259 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.