claudecodex

done-is-a-claim

Evidence-first workflows for acceptance, verification, reviews, handoffs and delivery.

33 on GitHubby Gritv1.8.0Apache-2.0updated 18 days agoDeveloper Tools
/

Plugin done-is-a-claim from marketplace done-is-a-claim-marketplace in Grit-77/done-is-a-claim. Commands read from the repo's manifest — 18 days ago.

What it installs

Skills (15)

  • acceptance-design

    Define executable acceptance for a bounded task before work or dispatch. Use when writing a worker brief, selecting success checks, or repairing an acceptance contract that cannot test the intended outcome.

  • checking-delivery

    Verify an artifact at its actual delivery destination and distinguish send attempts, acknowledgements, publication and consumer checks. Use when reporting a file, message, export or deployment as delivered; creating a local draft alone does not imply delivery.

  • collecting-worker-results

    Inspect a stopped worker's returned work and evidence before accepting it, retrying it or handing it to an integration owner. Use when a worker finishes, records disagree, or a green result has no visible change. Collection does not authorize merging.

  • debugging-with-evidence

    Diagnose unexpected behavior with a reproduction, competing explanations and experiments that separate them before fixing. Use for bugs, failed checks or repeated unsuccessful fixes; attribute branch failures only with suitable comparison evidence.

  • evidence-freshness

    Bind a check or action to the input snapshot it actually used. Use before relying on cached verification, consuming a reviewed batch, acting while inputs may change, or retrying an operation with an ambiguous result.

  • executing-plans

    Carry an actionable change plan through implementation, checks, review and an evidence-backed report. Use when executing several planned steps or integrating bounded worker returns, within existing authorization.

  • implementing-with-tests

    Implement runtime behavior changes and bug fixes with meaningful before-and-after checks, preserved behavior and relevant regression evidence. Use while editing code; prose-only changes do not need a failing test.

  • planning-changes

    Prepare a compact, executable plan for a substantial change with acceptance, file ownership, dependencies and expected observations. Use when several steps or collaborators need coordination; tiny clear edits can proceed directly.

  • public-claims

    Write and fact-check public copy so that every figure, credential, promise and command has a receipt - a source with a locator, a command that re-derives it, or the author's own words - and remove any claim without one instead of softening it. Use when drafting or reviewing a README, release notes,

  • reading-measurements

    Read a number without being fooled by it: an exit code, a passing result file, a test count, a list size, a control run, a red or a green. Use before reporting any figure, before turning a test run into a verdict, before acting on 'N items are broken', and whenever two outputs or two counts of the s

  • responding-to-review

    Resolve incoming code-review feedback against the current revision and user contract. Use to assess comments, implement authorized fixes, explain supported disagreement and verify item status; review does not authorize posting replies.

  • resuming-work

    Resume a saved task after a session, context or machine change by checking its checkpoint, artifacts and current ownership. Use when receiving unfinished work or reconciling a stop; ordinary uninterrupted edits do not need a handoff.

  • reviewing-changes

    Review an actual candidate against the user's acceptance and scope, then carry findings through fixes, affected checks and rereview. Use before claiming a substantive change complete or accepting a worker's implementation.

  • using-done-is-a-claim

    Choose an evidence-first path for a development task, from acceptance through execution, review and completion. Use when starting substantive work or deciding the next step; clear tiny edits can proceed directly.

  • whose-red

    Investigate whether a failing test run is caused by a change, was already broken on main, or is inconclusive, using matched branch and clean-main runs. Use when tests fail on a branch or PR, when an agent says 'this failure is pre-existing', or before retrying or reverting a fix.

View source on GitHub

Similar plugins

superpowers

claudecodex

Core skills library for Claude Code: TDD, debugging, collaboration patterns, and proven techniques

15 skills · hooks

obra/superpowers 316,836

Scaffold, validate, and publish new Claude Code plugins with proper structure

3 skills · 1 command · 1 agent

ruvnet/ruflo 81,589

context7

claudecodex

Up-to-date documentation lookup. Pull version-specific documentation and code examples directly from source repositories into your coding agent's context.

1 MCP server

upstash/context7 64,709

Use Alibaba Open Code Review from local Codex.

2 skills

alibaba/open-code-review 50,068

slidev

claude

Claude Code skill for creating and presenting Slidev slidedecks

1 skill

slidevjs/slidev 49,452

gitnexus

claudecodex

Code intelligence powered by a knowledge graph. Provides execution flow tracing, blast radius analysis, and augmented search across your codebase.

12 skills · 1 MCP server · hooks

abhigyanpatwari/GitNexus 48,482

Maintain done-is-a-claim?

This page updates itself from your repo. Add the badge to your README, or get it Featured to pin it above the organic results with a followed link to your site.

claude & codex pluginslisted