proof-of-work

Require command outputs and file changes as evidence for code quality claims.

187|20|Updated Nov 20, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/TheBushidoCollective/han --skill proof-of-work
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: proof-of-work
Source: https://github.com/TheBushidoCollective/han/tree/main/core/skills/proof-of-work
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/TheBushidoCollective/han --skill proof-of-work

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill enforces evidence-based claims about tests, builds, and quality through verifiable outputs.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Evidence-First Verification: Require actual command outputs and file changes as proof.
  • Audit-Ready Reports: Produce verifiable summaries of test results, git diffs, and build logs.
  • Agent Accountability: Ensure claims are backed by reproducible evidence.

Quick Start

After making a claim (e.g., tests pass), provide the exact git status, diffs, and sample outputs as proof.

Frequently Asked Questions about proof-of-work

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I provide verifiable proof that my code changes work?

Verifiable proof means showing actual command outputs—git diffs, build logs, test results, and file writes—not just claiming success. Use Write/Edit tools to create or modify files, then run git status, git diff, ls, and cat to document the evidence before reporting completion.

Can I use proof-of-work verification in CI pipelines and code reviews?

Yes. This approach applies across feature implementation, CI pipelines, code reviews, and agent delegation by requiring concrete outputs such as file writes and build logs as proof that quality checks passed.

What counts as valid evidence for build and test verification?

Valid evidence includes actual command outputs: git status showing file changes, git diff displaying code modifications, build logs confirming compilation, test result output proving test passage, and file content from cat confirming writes succeeded.

Why should I require evidence-based claims instead of trusting reported results?

Evidence-based verification creates audit-ready, reproducible records that hold claims accountable. Actual outputs prove quality gates passed rather than relying on assertions, enabling reproducibility and trust in development workflows.

How do I audit and document proof across multiple verification steps?

Collect mandatory verification outputs in sequence: perform Write/Edit operations, emit explicit success messages, then capture and report git status, diffs, and file contents as timestamped proof of each verification step completed.