codyswanngt/verify

Verify: $ARGUMENTS

Ship the current branch and prove it works in the target environment.

Orchestration: agent team

If you are NOT already operating inside an agent team (no prior successful team-creation or subagent-delegation tool call in this session, not spawned into a team context), the very first thing you do is establish team orchestration.

Use the team tool for the current runtime:

• Claude: use TeamCreate. If TeamCreate has not been loaded yet, first use ToolSearch with query: "select:TeamCreate" to load its schema.
• Codex: do not call TeamCreate; Codex does not expose that Claude tool. Use tool_search with a query like multi-agent tools to load multi_agent_v1, then use multi_agent_v1.spawn_agent for teammate delegation. Treat the first successful spawn_agent call as establishing team orchestration.
• Other runtimes: use the current runtime's tool-discovery mechanism to discover and call the appropriate multi-agent/team tool.

If no team creation or subagent delegation tool is available, explicitly state that team orchestration is unavailable in this runtime, continue as the lead agent, and preserve the workflow's review, verification, and task-tracking obligations locally.

Until the team is established, the first Codex teammate has been spawned, or the no-team fallback has been declared, do NOT call any of: Agent, TaskCreate, Skill, MCP tools (Atlassian / Linear / GitHub / Notion), Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep, Glob. Inspecting the branch, running quality gates, opening the PR — all of those are tasks for the team you are about to create, not for the lead session before orchestration exists.

If you ARE already inside an agent team (e.g., a teammate invoked this skill via the Skill tool), do NOT create a second team — many harnesses reject double-creates — and do NOT collapse the nested flow into a single inline worker. A nested team-first flow must still bring in the specialists it requires by adding them to the existing team, not by doing the work itself:

• Claude: teams are flat and only the lead can add named teammates, so do NOT call Agent with a name from a teammate (the harness rejects it: "Teammates cannot spawn other teammates — the team roster is flat"). Send the team lead a message naming the specialist teammate(s) this flow needs, their task assignments, and completion criteria, then coordinate through the shared task list until they finish. An anonymous subagent (Agent with name omitted) is permitted only for bounded one-shot work whose result returns directly to you — it is not a substitute for the required lifecycle specialists.
• Codex: do NOT call TeamCreate. If the lead/root agent is addressable (you were given its id/handle), send it a request to multi_agent_v1.spawn_agent the specialist agent(s), including each agent's prompt, ownership, and expected result. If no lead handle exists but spawn_agent is available to you, spawn only the bounded specialist agent(s) this flow needs, wait_agent for their results, and relay those results upward to the parent/lead.

Treat the first successful lead-spawn request (or, on the Codex fallback, the first specialist spawn) as preserving team orchestration. Never satisfy a team-first lifecycle flow by doing all the work inline.

Flow

Execute the Verify flow as defined in the intent-routing rule (loaded via the lisa plugin). The flow includes:

1. Pre-flight: codification gate — confirm that every passing local empirical verification on this branch was codified as a regression test (the Implement flow's codify step). If any verification has no committed test and no allowed skip reason (PR / Documentation / Deploy / Investigate-Only), invoke codify-verification now and amend the PR before shipping. A change cannot ship until its verifications are guarded.
2. Commit any pending changes via lisa:git-commit
3. Push and PR via lisa:git-submit-pr
4. Review loop — handle CodeRabbit / human review comments via lisa:pull-request-review
5. Merge when CI is green
6. Remote verification — invoke the lisa:monitor skill against the target environment to confirm the deploy actually works (health endpoints, recent logs/errors, Validation Journey replay if defined). If remote verification surfaces a behavioral gap that the existing codified tests do not guard, invoke codify-verification to add coverage and open a follow-up PR.
7. Evidence usage — before posting, route the generated evidence artifact through lisa:usage-accounting so the comment body / PR evidence section / markdown proof carries a direct verify usage entry in the canonical ## Lisa Usage section. If the originating work item or PRD parentage is known, prefer record_and_rollup so ancestor totals refresh in the same pass. If runtime usage is unavailable, still write source: unavailable with nullable token/cost fields instead of skipping the row.
8. Evidence — post results to the originating ticket via lisa:tracker-evidence (vendor-neutral; dispatches to lisa:jira-evidence, lisa:github-evidence, or lisa:linear-evidence per .lisa.config.json tracker), including the list of codified tests added on this branch. If the work is UI-visible (any verification step ran in a browser, or the change touches a user-facing surface), author evidence/comment.md per the UI Evidence Checklist in lisa:tracker-evidence — numbered live-session steps, one Playwright-MCP screenshot per step uploaded to the GitHub pr-assets release as plain URLs, and an explicit invitation to be corrected.

The rule contains the canonical step sequence. Change it there, propagate everywhere.

Output

A merged PR, a successful deploy to the target environment, and posted evidence on the originating work item.