# Amiable Dev LLM Council Council Verify

> Council Verification Skill

- Skill: `tomevault-io/amiable-dev-llm-council-council-verify` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/amiable-dev-llm-council-council-verify`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomevault-io/amiable-dev-llm-council-council-verify/raw
- Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS)
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: AI & ML
- Author: tomevault-io (https://skillmd.com/u/tomevault-io)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tomevault-io/amiable-dev-llm-council-council-verify

---


# Council Verification Skill

Use LLM Council's multi-model deliberation to verify work with structured, machine-actionable verdicts.

## When to Use

- Verify code changes before committing
- Validate implementation against requirements
- Check documents for accuracy and completeness
- Get multi-model consensus on quality

## Workflow

1. **Capture Snapshot**: Capture current git diff or file state (snapshot pinning for reproducibility)
2. **Invoke Verification**: Call `mcp:llm-council/verify` with isolated context
3. **Receive Verdict**: Get structured JSON with verdict, confidence, and blocking issues
4. **Audit Trail**: Persist transcript via `mcp:llm-council/audit`

## Parameters

| Parameter | Type | Default | Description |
|-----------|------|---------|-------------|
| `snapshot_id` | string | required | Git commit SHA for reproducibility |
| `rubric_focus` | string | null | Focus area: "Security", "Performance", "Accessibility" |
| `confidence_threshold` | float | 0.7 | Minimum confidence for PASS verdict |
| `tier` | string | "balanced" | Confidence tier: "quick", "balanced", "high", "reasoning" |

### Tier Selection Guide

| Tier | Use When | Timeout | Max Input |
|------|----------|---------|-----------|
| `quick` | Fast sanity checks, small diffs | ~30s | 15K chars |
| `balanced` | **Default.** Routine verification | ~90s | 30K chars |
| `high` | Security-critical reviews only | ~180s | 50K chars |
| `reasoning` | Complex architectural decisions | ~600s | 50K chars |

**Important**: `high`/`reasoning` use slow frontier models. For large diffs (>20K chars), prefer `balanced` to avoid timeouts.

## Output Schema

```json
{
  "verdict": "pass|fail|unclear",
  "confidence": 0.85,
  "rubric_scores": {
    "accuracy": 8.5,
    "completeness": 7.0,
    "clarity": 9.0,
    "conciseness": 8.0
  },
  "blocking_issues": [...],
  "rationale": "Chairman synthesis...",
  "transcript_location": ".council/logs/...",
  "partial": false,
  "timeout_fired": false,
  "completed_stages": ["stage1", "stage2", "stage3"],
  "timing": {
    "stage1_elapsed_ms": 45000,
    "stage2_elapsed_ms": 78000,
    "stage3_elapsed_ms": 19000,
    "total_elapsed_ms": 142000,
    "global_deadline_ms": 270000,
    "budget_utilization": 0.53
  },
  "input_metrics": {
    "content_chars": 32000,
    "tier_max_chars": 50000,
    "num_models": 4,
    "num_reviewers": 4,
    "tier": "high"
  }
}
```

### Timeout & Partial Results (ADR-040)

If `timeout_fired: true`, the tier deadline was exceeded. Check `completed_stages` for progress. Max input: quick=15K, balanced=30K, high/reasoning=50K chars. `timing.budget_utilization` shows time used vs deadline (1.0 on timeout). On timeout, only completed stages appear in `timing`.

## Rules

1. **One call at a time.** Never fire multiple verify calls concurrently or in rapid succession. Wait for each to complete before deciding next steps.
2. **One call per commit.** Never retry the same snapshot_id. If it fails, fix the code first.
3. **Act on verdicts, don't retry them:**
   - **PASS** (exit_code 0): Proceed.
   - **FAIL** (exit_code 1): Read `blocking_issues`. Fix the code, commit, then re-verify the *new* snapshot.
   - **UNCLEAR** (exit_code 2): Accept and move on. Do not retry.
4. **Do not reduce scope and retry.** Sending the same code with fewer files is still a retry.

## Related Skills

- `council-review`: Code review with structured feedback
- `council-gate`: CI/CD quality gate

---
> Converted and distributed by [TomeVault](https://tomevault.io/claim/amiable-dev) — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.
<!-- tomevault:4.0:skill_md:2026-04-11 -->