Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to opensesh/karimo-overview. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/opensesh/karimo-overview/main/.claude/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/opensesh/karimo-overviewWrote 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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/opensesh/karimo-overview/verification-before-completion)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/opensesh/karimo-overview/verification-before-completion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/opensesh/karimo-overview/verification-before-completion/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/opensesh/karimo-overview/verification-before-completion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/opensesh/karimo-overview/verification-before-completion.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00000 | $0.01371 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00548 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00274 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00137 |
Grade A, and why
verification-before-completion 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 1mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 229 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verification Before Completion
This skill activates before ANY claim of completion, success, or task finish. Triggers on phrases like "done", "complete", "finished", "working", "fixed", "ready for review".
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE
Bypassing verification is not efficiency—it's misrepresentation. Trust depends on accuracy. Every claim must be backed by concrete evidence gathered in THIS session.
The Gate Function
Before asserting ANY positive status, execute this sequence:
1. IDENTIFY → What command/check proves the claim?
2. RUN → Execute it completely and freshly
3. READ → Examine FULL output, not just success messages
4. VERIFY → Does output actually confirm the claim?
5. CLAIM → Only then make assertion with evidence
Skipping ANY step = unverified claim = potential misrepresentation
Claim Types & Required Evidence
| Claim | Required Evidence |
|---|---|
| "Tests pass" | Fresh test output showing zero failures |
| "Lint clean" | Linter output with zero errors/warnings |
| "Build succeeds" | Build output + exit code 0 |
| "Bug fixed" | Original failing case now passes |
| "Feature complete" | Line-by-line requirement verification |
| "PR ready" | All checks pass + diff review |
BOS-Specific Verification Checkpoints
For UI/frontend work, add these verification steps:
Design System Compliance Check
# Search for hardcoded colors (should return empty)
grep -r "#[0-9A-Fa-f]\{6\}" --include="*.tsx" --include="*.css" | grep -v "var(--"
# Search for forbidden patterns
grep -r "border-white\|border-black\|bg-white\|bg-black" --include="*.tsx"
Semantic Token Usage
# Verify CSS variable usage in new files
grep -r "var(--bg-\|var(--fg-\|var(--border-" components/
React Aria Compliance
// For interactive elements, verify React Aria usage
import { Button } from 'react-aria-components'; // ✅ Correct
import { button } from './button'; // ❌ Check if React Aria based
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 229 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 6b1855de230b
verification-before-completion is a skill published in the GitHub repository opensesh/karimo-overview (11 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,371 tokens. 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
ccg-workflow
How to run a non-trivial change end to end with the CCG role tools (ccganalyze / ccgdesign / ccgbuild / ccgdebug / ccgoptimize / ccgreview / ccgtest) and the verify- quality gates. Use when a task is a whole feature, a refactor, a bug whose cause is not yet known, or any change large enough that one straight-through…
test-driven-development
This skill should be used when implementing features or fixing bugs. Enforces RED-GREEN-REFACTOR.
qa
This skill should be used when designing or running scenario-based acceptance tests.
testing
This skill should be used when the user asks to "write tests", "fix failing tests", "improve test coverage" or "debug a flaky test", or reviews test quality.
cdt
Multi-agent development workflow using Agent Teams. Supports five modes: plan (architect teammate + PM teammate debate → plan.md), dev (developer teammate + code-tester teammate + qa-tester teammate + reviewer teammate iterate → code), full (plan → approval gate → dev), auto (plan → dev, no gate), and bugfix (tester +…
qa
Systematically QA test a web application and fix bugs found. Runs QA testing, then iteratively fixes bugs in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying. Use when asked to "qa", "QA", "test this site", "find bugs", "test and fix", or "fix what's broken". Proactively suggest when the user says a…