rhowardstone Verification Before Completion
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 in this message, you cannot claim it passes.
The Gate Function
BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:
1. IDENTIFY: What command/check proves this claim?
2. RUN: Execute the FULL verification (fresh, complete)
3. READ: Full output, check results, 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" |
| Build succeeds | Build command: exit 0 | Linter passing, looks good |
| Bug fixed | Test original symptom: passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |
| Experiment worked | Data shows expected result | Protocol completed, assumed success |
| Finding confirmed | Statistical test: significant | Pattern observed, assumed real |
| Replication succeeded | Same result within tolerance | Similar result, close enough |
| Analysis complete | All steps executed, output verified | Script ran without errors |
| 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/publish/report without verification
- Trusting automated reports without checking
- Relying on partial verification
- Thinking "just this once"
- Tired and wanting work over
- ANY wording implying success without having run verification
Rationalization Prevention
| Excuse | Reality |
|---|---|
| "Should work now" | RUN the verification |
| "I'm confident" | Confidence ≠ evidence |
| "Just this once" | No exceptions |
| "Script passed" | Script success ≠ correct results |
| "Agent said success" | Verify independently |
| "I'm tired" | Exhaustion ≠ excuse |
| "Partial check is enough" | Partial proves nothing |
| "Different words so rule doesn't apply" | Spirit over letter |
Key Patterns
Software - Tests:
✅ [Run test command] [See: 34/34 pass] "All tests pass"
❌ "Should pass now" / "Looks correct"
Software - Build:
✅ [Run build] [See: exit 0] "Build passes"
❌ "Linter passed" (linter doesn't check compilation)
Research - Experiment:
✅ [Check data] [See: effect size X, p < 0.05] "Hypothesis supported"
❌ "Experiment completed" / "Data collected"
Research - Replication:
✅ [Compare results] [See: within 5% of original] "Replication successful"
❌ "Protocol followed correctly"
Requirements:
✅ Re-read requirements → Create checklist → Verify each → Report gaps or completion
❌ "Tests pass, phase complete"
Agent delegation:
✅ Agent reports success → Check actual output → Verify changes → Report actual state
❌ Trust agent report
Why This Matters
From past failures:
- Trust broken: "I don't believe you"
- Broken code shipped: would crash in production
- False findings reported: would fail replication
- Missing requirements shipped: incomplete work
- Time wasted on false completion → redirect → rework
- Violates: "Honesty is a core value."
When To Apply
ALWAYS before:
- ANY variation of success/completion claims
- ANY expression of satisfaction
- ANY positive statement about work state
- Committing, publishing, reporting, sharing
- Moving to next task
- Delegating to agents
Rule applies to:
- Exact phrases
- Paraphrases and synonyms
- Implications of success
- ANY communication suggesting completion/correctness
The Bottom Line
No shortcuts for verification.
Run the check. Read the output. THEN claim the result.
This is non-negotiable.