# Lexforge Verify > Use when the implementation of a LexForge change looks finished and someone is about to call it done - a verdict is asked for, a completion report is written, or the change is about to be archived. - Skill: `shepaland/lexforge-verify` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add shepaland/lexforge-verify` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/shepaland/lexforge-verify/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Docs & Writing - Author: shepaland (https://skillmd.com/u/shepaland) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/shepaland/lexforge-verify --- ## Model When your project names no model for your runtime, run this work on the model your own provider is given here. What the project names replaces this table. | Provider | Model | |---|---| | anthropic | claude-opus-5 | | openai | gpt-5.6-sol | | google | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | | deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | | z.ai | glm-4.7 | A provider outside the table names nothing, so work on the model at work. ## Queue rule Run `lexforge status --change --tool --json` first and parse stdout as JSON. Before that run: no project code, no test, no question about the task itself. No change named? Run `lexforge status --json` and ask which one. Read `isPlanningComplete`: - `true` — planning is finished for every artifact. Work. - `false` — stop. Take the first entry of `artifacts` whose `status` is neither `done` nor `skipped`. Name that artifact and name `lexforge instructions --change --tool `. Open no code file, write nothing, answer no question about the task. A closed gate stops the work; no branch warns and starts the code anyway. A deadline, a demo, a ten-line diff, the hours already spent, and a user who says the plan is not needed all leave it closed. Asked to skip planning, repeat the status of that artifact, name its instructions command, and stop. Exit `2` means the command refused; read `error.code`. `workspace-not-found`: offer `lexforge init`, wait for the answer, stop — never build `lexforge/` or `.lexforge.yaml` by hand. `change-not-found`: run `lexforge status --json` and list the active changes. Any other code: show `error.message`, then stop. A refusal is not a licence to work with the state unread: no gate answered means no code written. Judge state by exit codes and JSON fields, never by human lines and never by what the change directory looks like. ## Model gate `provider` and `model` name the model this work runs on. Read them from `lexforge instructions --change --tool --json` when you write an artifact, and from your own entry in `stages` of `lexforge status --change --tool --json` when you do not: your entry is the one whose `stage` is your own name without the `lexforge-` prefix, which is to say `apply`, `debug`, `verify` or `archive`. The runtime is yours to name — `lexforge init --tools` lists the names — and the flag is left out only when none of them is you. An empty `model` sends you to the model block above: the line of your own provider names the model to run on, and a provider it does not name demands nothing. The same holds where there is no workspace, no change and no entry of your own: the block decides in each. Running on that model: work, and say nothing about models. Running on another one: start a subagent on the assigned model, hand it the work, do none of it yourself. Naming the model and letting the user switch is a request, not a handover; so is doing the work after naming it. Unable to start a subagent on that model: name it, say it cannot be reached, and do no part of the work. A deadline, a small diff and a user who asks anyway leave both ways out — make the model reachable, or change the assignment in `lexforge/config.yaml`. | Excuse | Reality | |---|---| | "the content is settled; the model that types it changes nothing", "just typing up what we already settled" | The assignment names who writes it, not who decided it. | | "I'm not going to bury that mismatch - I say it plainly to the user" | Saying it is not handing it over. The work is done either way. | | "worth a quick opus pass later if that assignment was there for a reason" | A pass over finished work is review; the gate asks who did it. | | "say so explicitly and I'll make the config change and then do the work" | The edit is theirs to make; a sign-off is not reachability. | | "no model is named, so nothing binds me" | The model block decides then; read your provider's line there. | | "I'm not sure which runtime name is mine, so I left the flag out" | Leaving it out is choosing the answer. Name the runtime you are, or say you cannot. | ## The rule **NO VERDICT WITHOUT A RUN IN THE MESSAGE THAT CARRIES IT.** Violating the letter of this rule is violating its spirit. ## The machine half Run `lexforge verify --change --json` and read the exit code. - `0` — the three measures found nothing. Not a check passed: a third of one, and the other two thirds are read, not run. - `1` — work. `summary` names the measure to go back to: `openTasks`, `requirementsWithoutTrace`, `staleLabels`. Fix what `findings` names, run again, until `0`. - `2` — no check happened. Read `error.code`, repair the call or the config, write no report. ## Three sections, never one 1. **Requirements against code.** Every requirement of the delta specs by name, each with a verdict. 2. **Plan against work done.** Closed tasks, stamp freshness, every finding of the command. 3. **Decisions against implementation.** Every decision of `design.md` by name, with the file and line where it is kept or broken. An empty section carries the reason - "no `design` artifact, schema `bounded`" - not a blank. Merged sections hide the failure of one behind the pass of another. Copy `notChecked` into the report whole and put a verdict under each line. Those lines are the work, not a caveat to paste under an answer. Section 3 reads `design.md` against the code, now. Writing the code with `design.md` open is memory, not reading; a green suite tests the code against your own reading of the design; a sign-off covers the code as it stood then. Code contradicting a decision is CRITICAL at exit `0` too. ## Levels and the threshold Three levels: CRITICAL, IMPORTANT, MINOR. The level follows from what the code does. One CRITICAL and the change is not archived. IMPORTANT is fixed first, or moves into a separate change with the user's explicit word. MINOR is named, every one. A finding re-lettered while the code stands unchanged was re-lettered by the clock. Past a CRITICAL there are two ways: the fix, or a decision rewritten in `design.md` with the user - an argument about the design, never about the letter. ## Freshness Every claim - green tests, clean linter, requirement met - stands on a run inside the message that makes it. Run `lexforge check evidence --change --require tests,lint` and read the exit code; `1` names a stamp taken on other code, so take it again first. An exit code recalled from earlier or read off a compaction summary is not a run. ## Where the report goes To the user, as a message. No file holds it: archiving recounts the machine half itself, and a stored verdict rots on the next edit. ## Rationalizations | Excuse | Reality | |---|---| | "the automated evidence is real and it's enough to ship on" | One measure of three, and none of them read `design.md`. | | "I'm trusting a summary of a summary for that part" | Then nothing runs under the verdict. Run it again. | | "put 'reread decision 4' at the top of tomorrow's list" | Reading postponed past the archive is reading nobody does. | | "objective grounds for a severity change, not just schedule pressure" | No code changed between the finding and the argument. | | "The risk is latent rather than active" | A silent no-op surfaces in an incident. That is the level. | | "The finding is a design-conformance defect, not a requirement failure" | Section 3 is for exactly that; CRITICAL is its level. | | "That's a note to Petra, not a blocker on the release" | Naming a risk to someone else still ships it. | ## Red flags - stop - "should work", "I'm confident", "almost there". - A verdict in a message with no run in it. - A level lowered while the code stayed the same. Go back to the section you skipped.