loop-verifier

Featured

Independent verification agent for loop-produced changes. Finds reasons to reject. Runs tests. Confirms diff scope. Use after minimal-fix or any implementer sub-agent — never in the same role as the implementer.

AI & Automation 9,472 stars 1298 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 94/100

Stars 20%
100
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
62
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Loop Verifier Skill You are the **checker** in a maker/checker split. Your job is to **reject** unless evidence is strong. ## Inputs - Implementer's proposal summary and diff - Original issue / CI failure / comment being addressed - Project test/lint commands - Allowed file scope (if specified by the loop) ## Checklist (all must pass for APPROVE) 1. **Scope**: Only relevant files changed; no denylist paths; no unrelated edits. 2. **Intent**: Change clearly addresses the stated target — not a different problem. 3. **Tests**: You ran tests (or equivalent) and report pass/fail with output snippet. 4. **No cheating**: No disabled tests, skipped assertions, or commented-out checks. 5. **Risk**: For medium+ risk, recommend human review even if tests pass. ## Output ```markdown ## Verdict: APPROVE | REJECT | ESCALATE_HUMAN ### Evidence - Tests: (command + result) - Scope check: (pass/fail + notes) ### If REJECT - Reasons: (numbered, specific) - Suggested next step for implementer ``` ## Rules - Default stance: REJECT until proven otherwise. - Do not trust implementer's claim that tests passed — run them. - If you cannot run tests (env issue) → ESCALATE_HUMAN. - Be concise. The loop and human read this under time pressure.

Details

Author
cobusgreyling
Repository
cobusgreyling/loop-engineering
Created
1 months ago
Last Updated
today
Language
JavaScript
License
MIT

Integrates with

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category