Proof Checker V2
Audit an existing proof as an independent verification step. Prefer a precise
blocker over an optimistic repair.
Operating Contract
Treat this skill as one reviewer step in a larger proof workflow.
- Do not spawn additional agents from inside this skill unless the user explicitly requests nested review.
- Use DeepSeek as the external reviewer when a DeepSeek route is available. Prefer an MCP bridge such as
llm-chat; use deepseek-agent only as fallback.
- Do not edit source proofs unless the user explicitly asks for a patch. Produce an audit, suggested fixes, and optional replacement statements.
- Do not silently strengthen assumptions or weaken conclusions. Label every such move as a proposed repair.
- Do not accept "clearly", "standard", "by symmetry", or "it follows" unless the missing obligation is genuinely trivial under stated assumptions.
- Use project-local source files before outside memory. If source support is missing, mark the claim as unverified.
- In Markdown notes, use
$...$ and $$...$$ math delimiters.
Inputs
Accept any of:
- a named theorem, lemma, proposition, proof sketch,
.md, or .tex file;
- a completed proof-task artifact such as
proof-logs/tasks/<TASK_ID>.md;
- a request to audit a section of a paper or note.
If the target is ambiguous, inspect nearby context and ask only when multiple
plausible targets would lead to different audits.
Workflow
- Locate the exact proof boundary: statement, assumptions, definitions, cited lemmas, and conclusion.
- Restate the claim with explicit quantifiers, parameter domains, limit order, and dependencies of constants when relevant.
- Build a lightweight obligation ledger:
- hypotheses used at each application;
- nontrivial micro-claims;
- analytic interchanges and required side conditions;
- asymptotic uniformity and hidden parameter dependence;
- dependency and circularity risks.
- Load
references/deepseek-routing.md and send the audit brief to DeepSeek using the first available route.
- Check DeepSeek's response against
references/audit-rubric.md; do not accept unsupported issue labels or missing locations without review.
- Attempt simple counterexamples for global or structural claims: one-dimensional collapse, degenerate parameters, boundary cases, and adversarial scaling.
- Assign a verdict and write the audit using
references/output-contract.md.
Reviewer Route
Use these routes in order:
- an installed DeepSeek MCP bridge, for example
mcp__llm_chat__chat;
deepseek-agent with an answer-only result file;
- local Codex audit only if both DeepSeek routes are blocked.
When using the local-only fallback, mark the saved audit as BLOCKED or WARN
with reviewer_backend: "local-codex-fallback" unless the caller explicitly
permits local-only verification.
Never write API keys into the repository. Do not run connectivity checks unless
the user asks or a proof-checker invocation needs them to complete the requested
audit.
Verdicts
PASS: The proof appears justified under the stated assumptions.
WARN: Only minor or local gaps remain; the main conclusion likely survives.
FAIL: A fatal or critical gap, false statement, circular dependency, or missing global assumption blocks the proof.
BLOCKED: The target proof or required dependency cannot be read.
NOT_APPLICABLE: No theorem or proof content is present.
Use the statuses PROVABLE AS STATED,
PROVABLE AFTER WEAKENING / EXTRA ASSUMPTION, and
NOT CURRENTLY JUSTIFIED when auditing a single theorem-like claim.
Output Location
Follow the caller's requested destination. If none is given:
- For a proof task file, write beside it as
proof-logs/tasks/<TASK_ID>-audit.md.
- For a broad proof-plan audit, update or create
proof-logs/PROOF_AUDIT.md.
- For a one-off chat request, answer in chat and do not create files.
- For a formal paper workflow that explicitly expects an assurance artifact, write
<paper-dir>/PROOF_AUDIT.json using the schema in references/output-contract.md.
Final Response
Keep the final response short:
- verdict;
- most serious issue, if any;
- files written or updated;
- what remains unverified.
Load references/deepseek-routing.md before reviewer calls,
references/audit-rubric.md for detailed checks, and
references/output-contract.md before writing a saved audit.
1---2name: proof-checker-v23description: Independent DeepSeek-backed adversarial proof-audit step for existing theorem, lemma, proposition, or proof artifacts in Markdown, LaTeX, or proof logs. Use when asked to check, audit, verify, red-team, or adversarially review a proof; when a completed proof task needs a correctness pass; or when a broader proof workflow dispatches an independent reviewer to find gaps, hidden assumptions, counterexamples, or unjustified steps.4---56# Proof Checker V278Audit an existing proof as an independent verification step. Prefer a precise9blocker over an optimistic repair.1011## Operating Contract1213Treat this skill as one reviewer step in a larger proof workflow.1415- Do not spawn additional agents from inside this skill unless the user explicitly requests nested review.16- Use DeepSeek as the external reviewer when a DeepSeek route is available. Prefer an MCP bridge such as `llm-chat`; use `deepseek-agent` only as fallback.17- Do not edit source proofs unless the user explicitly asks for a patch. Produce an audit, suggested fixes, and optional replacement statements.18- Do not silently strengthen assumptions or weaken conclusions. Label every such move as a proposed repair.19- Do not accept "clearly", "standard", "by symmetry", or "it follows" unless the missing obligation is genuinely trivial under stated assumptions.20- Use project-local source files before outside memory. If source support is missing, mark the claim as unverified.21- In Markdown notes, use `$...$` and `$$...$$` math delimiters.2223## Inputs2425Accept any of:2627- a named theorem, lemma, proposition, proof sketch, `.md`, or `.tex` file;28- a completed proof-task artifact such as `proof-logs/tasks/<TASK_ID>.md`;29- a request to audit a section of a paper or note.3031If the target is ambiguous, inspect nearby context and ask only when multiple32plausible targets would lead to different audits.3334## Workflow35361. Locate the exact proof boundary: statement, assumptions, definitions, cited lemmas, and conclusion.372. Restate the claim with explicit quantifiers, parameter domains, limit order, and dependencies of constants when relevant.383. Build a lightweight obligation ledger:39 - hypotheses used at each application;40 - nontrivial micro-claims;41 - analytic interchanges and required side conditions;42 - asymptotic uniformity and hidden parameter dependence;43 - dependency and circularity risks.444. Load `references/deepseek-routing.md` and send the audit brief to DeepSeek using the first available route.455. Check DeepSeek's response against `references/audit-rubric.md`; do not accept unsupported issue labels or missing locations without review.466. Attempt simple counterexamples for global or structural claims: one-dimensional collapse, degenerate parameters, boundary cases, and adversarial scaling.477. Assign a verdict and write the audit using `references/output-contract.md`.4849## Reviewer Route5051Use these routes in order:52531. an installed DeepSeek MCP bridge, for example `mcp__llm_chat__chat`;542. `deepseek-agent` with an answer-only result file;553. local Codex audit only if both DeepSeek routes are blocked.5657When using the local-only fallback, mark the saved audit as `BLOCKED` or `WARN`58with `reviewer_backend: "local-codex-fallback"` unless the caller explicitly59permits local-only verification.6061Never write API keys into the repository. Do not run connectivity checks unless62the user asks or a proof-checker invocation needs them to complete the requested63audit.6465## Verdicts6667- `PASS`: The proof appears justified under the stated assumptions.68- `WARN`: Only minor or local gaps remain; the main conclusion likely survives.69- `FAIL`: A fatal or critical gap, false statement, circular dependency, or missing global assumption blocks the proof.70- `BLOCKED`: The target proof or required dependency cannot be read.71- `NOT_APPLICABLE`: No theorem or proof content is present.7273Use the statuses `PROVABLE AS STATED`,74`PROVABLE AFTER WEAKENING / EXTRA ASSUMPTION`, and75`NOT CURRENTLY JUSTIFIED` when auditing a single theorem-like claim.7677## Output Location7879Follow the caller's requested destination. If none is given:8081- For a proof task file, write beside it as `proof-logs/tasks/<TASK_ID>-audit.md`.82- For a broad proof-plan audit, update or create `proof-logs/PROOF_AUDIT.md`.83- For a one-off chat request, answer in chat and do not create files.84- For a formal paper workflow that explicitly expects an assurance artifact, write `<paper-dir>/PROOF_AUDIT.json` using the schema in `references/output-contract.md`.8586## Final Response8788Keep the final response short:8990- verdict;91- most serious issue, if any;92- files written or updated;93- what remains unverified.9495Load `references/deepseek-routing.md` before reviewer calls,96`references/audit-rubric.md` for detailed checks, and97`references/output-contract.md` before writing a saved audit.