📦 deps(playbook): sync playbook snapshot

docs/standards/playbook/codex/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md

@@ -1,48 +1,139 @@
 ---
 name: verification-before-completion
-description:
-  "Evidence-based verification before claiming completion. Triggers: verify,
-  verification, run tests, prove, 验证, 跑一下, 确认一下, 自证."
+description: Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
 ---
 
-# Verification Before Completion（先验证再宣称完成）
+# Verification Before Completion
 
-## When to Use
+## Overview
 
-- Any task where correctness matters (bug fixes, refactors, releases)
-- When the environment is complex or assumptions are likely
+Claiming work is complete without verification is dishonesty, not efficiency.
 
-## Inputs（required）
+**Core principle:** Evidence before claims, always.
 
-- What “done” means (acceptance criteria)
-- The smallest verification command(s) that prove it
-- Constraints: cannot run tests? no access? limited environment?
+**Violating the letter of this rule is violating the spirit of this rule.**
 
-## Procedure（default）
+## The Iron Law
 
-1. **Define Success Signals**
-   - Tests passing, build artifacts produced, commands return 0
-   - Specific output text or file diffs
+```
+NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE
+```
 
-2. **Run the Smallest Check**
-   - Start narrow (changed module tests) then broaden if needed
+If you haven't run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.
 
-3. **Record Evidence**
-   - Capture key output lines, exit codes, and relevant file paths
+## The Gate Function
 
-4. **Handle Gaps**
-   - If verification can’t be run, say why and offer alternatives (manual
-     checklist, static reasoning, targeted logs)
+```
+BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:
 
-## Output Contract（stable）
+1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?
+2. RUN: Execute the FULL command (fresh, complete)
+3. READ: Full output, check exit code, 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
 
-- What changed
-- What was verified (exact commands)
-- Evidence (exit codes / key outputs)
-- What was not verified (and why)
-- Next steps (if any)
+Skip any step = lying, not verifying
+```
 
-## Guardrails
+## Common Failures
 
-- Don’t claim “fixed” without a verification signal
-- Prefer repeatable commands over subjective inspection
+| Claim | Requires | Not Sufficient |
+|-------|----------|----------------|
+| Tests pass | Test command output: 0 failures | Previous run, "should pass" |
+| Linter clean | Linter output: 0 errors | Partial check, extrapolation |
+| Build succeeds | Build command: exit 0 | Linter passing, logs look good |
+| Bug fixed | Test original symptom: passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |
+| Regression test works | Red-green cycle verified | Test passes once |
+| Agent completed | VCS diff shows changes | Agent reports "success" |
+| 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/push/PR without verification
+- Trusting agent success reports
+- 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 |
+| "Linter passed" | Linter ≠ compiler |
+| "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
+
+**Tests:**
+```
+✅ [Run test command] [See: 34/34 pass] "All tests pass"
+❌ "Should pass now" / "Looks correct"
+```
+
+**Regression tests (TDD Red-Green):**
+```
+✅ Write → Run (pass) → Revert fix → Run (MUST FAIL) → Restore → Run (pass)
+❌ "I've written a regression test" (without red-green verification)
+```
+
+**Build:**
+```
+✅ [Run build] [See: exit 0] "Build passes"
+❌ "Linter passed" (linter doesn't check compilation)
+```
+
+**Requirements:**
+```
+✅ Re-read plan → Create checklist → Verify each → Report gaps or completion
+❌ "Tests pass, phase complete"
+```
+
+**Agent delegation:**
+```
+✅ Agent reports success → Check VCS diff → Verify changes → Report actual state
+❌ Trust agent report
+```
+
+## Why This Matters
+
+From 24 failure memories:
+- your human partner said "I don't believe you" - trust broken
+- Undefined functions shipped - would crash
+- Missing requirements shipped - incomplete features
+- Time wasted on false completion → redirect → rework
+- Violates: "Honesty is a core value. If you lie, you'll be replaced."
+
+## When To Apply
+
+**ALWAYS before:**
+- ANY variation of success/completion claims
+- ANY expression of satisfaction
+- ANY positive statement about work state
+- Committing, PR creation, task completion
+- 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 command. Read the output. THEN claim the result.
+
+This is non-negotiable.