msd-core/gsd-core/references/few-shot-examples/verifier.md

component, version, last_calibrated, calibration_source

component	version	last_calibrated	calibration_source
verifier	2	2026-03-25	Adapted from thinking-partner verification corpus

Verifier Few-Shot Examples

Positive Examples

Example 1: Thorough multi-level artifact verification with real gap discovery

Input: Must-have artifact: gsd-core/workflows/context-bridge.md: >50 lines

Output:

L1 (Existence): EXISTS -- gsd-core/workflows/context-bridge.md found, 187 lines. L2 (Substantive): SUBSTANTIVE -- No TODO/FIXME markers, 4 defined sections (updateContextTier, getContextBudget, injectContextWarning, resetTierState), non-trivial logic with config reads and threshold calculations. L3 (Wired): WIRED -- Referenced by gsd-core/workflows/execute-phase.md at step 3. Called by agents/gsd-executor.md via @-reference include. Arguments verified: receives planning directory path matching the expected parameter. Status: PASSED

Why this is good: The verifier checked all three levels independently with specific evidence at each level -- file path, line count, exported symbols, import location, and argument verification. It did not stop at "file exists" but traced wiring through to actual usage with correct arguments.

Example 2: Correct FAILED classification with grep evidence

Input: Must-have truth: validate-commit.js rejects commits missing scope parentheses

Output:

Method: Ran grep -n "scope" gsd-core/bin/validate-commit.js to locate scope validation logic. Evidence: Lines 34-41 show regex /^(feat|fix|refactor|test|docs|chore|wip)\(/ which requires opening paren after type. However, no test for MISSING closing paren exists -- the regex accepts feat(: description (missing scope content and closing paren). Ran: echo "feat(: test" | node gsd-core/bin/validate-commit.js -- exit code 0 (accepted). Status: FAILED -- Commit messages with empty scope feat(: desc) are accepted. The truth "rejects commits missing scope parentheses" does not hold for empty-scope edge case.

Why this is good: The verifier did not trust the code's intent -- it ran an actual test with an edge case input and reported the specific failure. Evidence includes the regex, the test command, the exit code, and why the truth does not hold.

Example 3: Catching missing wiring (calibration-derived gap pattern)

Input: Must-have key_link: check-subagent-output.js imports and calls feedback-loop.js extractFeedback()

Output:

Method: Ran grep -n "feedback-loop\|extractFeedback" gsd-core/bin/check-subagent-output.js. Evidence: Zero matches. The file feedback-loop.js exists (172 lines, substantive), and tests/feedback-loop.test.js passes (229 lines). But check-subagent-output.js never imports or calls it. Cross-check: grep -rn "require.*feedback-loop" gsd-core/bin/ returns zero results across all scripts. Status: FAILED -- The artifact exists and is tested, but is completely orphaned. The key_link "imports and calls" does not hold. This is a missing wiring gap.

Why this is good: The verifier caught a common calibration pattern: code that exists, is tested, but is never actually wired into the system. L1 and L2 pass, but L3 (wiring) fails. This pattern accounts for 37% of all gaps found in calibration corpus.

Example 4: Catching missing config schema entries (calibration-derived gap pattern)

Input: Must-have truth: Config toggles features.architecture_graph and features.architecture_guard exist with defaults

Output:

Method: Ran grep "architecture_graph\|architecture_guard" gsd-core/bin/lib/config-schema.json. Evidence: Zero matches in schema. However, grep "architecture" gsd-core/bin/lib/config.cjs shows both flags in CONFIG_DEFAULTS (lines 426, 428). Gap: Defaults exist in code but schema validation doesn't know about them. configValidate() would strip these fields on load, making the defaults unreachable. Status: FAILED -- Config flags work in code but are invisible to schema validation. This is a missing wiring gap between config layers.

Why this is good: The verifier checked multiple config layers (schema vs defaults vs code) rather than just one. Config wiring requires schema + defaults + code to agree -- checking only one layer misses layer-mismatch bugs.

Example 5: Distinguishing planning gaps from execution failures

Input: Must-have truth: All MSYS regex patterns consolidated into shared module

Output:

Method: Ran grep -rn "\/\[a-zA-Z\]\/" gsd-core/bin/ to find inline MSYS regex. Evidence: 2 matches in commands/gsd/misc.md (lines 26, 487). These were NOT in the original plan scope -- Phase 148 extracted code into misc.md AFTER Phase 149's plan was written. Assessment: The executor correctly completed all planned tasks. The gap is a planning ordering issue, not an execution failure. Status: PASS_WITH_NOTES -- Executor did what was planned. Unconsolidated regex noted as follow-up, not as a failure of this phase.

Why this is good: The verifier distinguished between what was planned vs what exists now. Code that changed AFTER plan creation is a planning gap, not an executor failure. This prevents false FAIL verdicts on correctly-executed work.

Calibration-Derived Gap Patterns

Based on analysis of verification corpus (80% pass rate, 8 gaps):

Pattern	Count	% of Gaps	What to Check
Missing wiring	3	37%	File exists + tested but never imported/called by consumer
Missing tests	2	25%	Feature works but test file excluded from CI or never runs
Other	3	38%	Config layer mismatches, planning ordering issues, schema gaps

Negative Examples

Example 1: Blanket pass with no per-criterion evidence

Input: Must-haves: 5 truths, 3 artifacts, 2 key_links from plan frontmatter.

Output:

All must-haves have been verified. The implementation matches the plan requirements. Files exist and are properly connected. Status: PASSED. must_haves_checked: 10, must_haves_passed: 10

Why this is bad: No individual must-have is listed or checked. No file paths, no line numbers, no grep output, no level-by-level breakdown. The verifier restated the must-haves as passing without showing any evidence. This would miss stubs, orphaned exports, and broken wiring.

Example 2: File existence check without substance or wiring verification

Input: Must-have artifact: gsd-core/bin/lib/audit-checks/index.cjs: >100 lines

Output:

L1 (Existence): EXISTS -- File found at gsd-core/bin/lib/audit-checks/index.cjs, 142 lines. Status: PASSED

Why this is bad: The verifier stopped at Level 1. The file has 142 lines but could contain // TODO: implement all checks with stub functions returning empty objects. Level 2 (substantive) and Level 3 (wired) were skipped entirely. A file that exists but is never imported or contains only placeholder code should not pass.