/ork:verify

The /ork:verify command gives you an honest, structured assessment of your implementation. Five specialized agents evaluate code quality, security, test coverage, API compliance, and UI patterns simultaneously. The results are combined into a weighted composite score (0-10) with a letter grade and a prioritized list of improvements ranked by effort vs. impact. This page explains the grading system, how to interpret results, and when to use verify in your workflow.

Why This Skill

Code review catches issues after you think you are done. Verification catches them before you commit. The difference matters: fixing a security vulnerability before commit is a 5-minute edit; fixing it after review means a new commit, re-review, and potentially a rebase. /ork:verify sits between implementation and commit, giving you a quality report while the code is still fresh in your working tree.

It is also useful as a standalone audit. Run it on code you did not write -- a new dependency, a colleague's branch, or legacy code you are about to modify -- and get a structured assessment before you touch anything.

Quick Start

/ork:verify authentication flow
/ork:verify user profile feature
/ork:verify --scope=backend database migrations

After invocation, OrchestKit asks for the verification scope:

• Full verification: All 5 agents, complete grading and suggestions
• Tests only: Run unit + integration + e2e tests, skip analysis
• Security audit: Focus on vulnerabilities
• Code quality: Focus on lint, types, complexity
• Quick check: Run tests only, skip detailed scoring

How It Works

Phase 1: Context Gathering

OrchestKit examines what changed since the base branch:

git diff main --stat
git log main..HEAD --oneline
git diff main --name-only

This scopes the verification to relevant files rather than auditing the entire codebase.

Phase 2: Parallel Agent Dispatch (5 Agents)

Five agents run simultaneously, each scoring their dimension 0-10:

Phase 3: Composite Scoring

The individual scores are weighted into a composite:

Security has the highest weight because security issues are the most expensive to fix after deployment.

Grade Interpretation

Phase 4: Improvement Suggestions

Each suggestion includes an effort estimate (1-5) and impact rating (1-5). Priority is calculated as impact / effort, surfacing quick wins first:

Quick wins are suggestions with effort 2 or below and impact 4 or above. These are the first things to address because they deliver the most value for the least work.

Common Patterns

Pattern 1: Post-Implementation Verification

The most common use -- verify your own work before committing:

/ork:implement search feature
# ... implementation complete ...
/ork:verify search feature
/ork:commit

Pattern 2: Pre-Review Audit

Before reviewing someone else's PR, run verify on their branch:

git checkout feature/user-auth
/ork:verify --scope=backend

This gives you a structured report before you start reading code, so you know where to focus your attention.

Pattern 3: Security-Focused Check

When the change touches authentication, authorization, or data handling:

/ork:verify --scope=security payment processing

Only the security-auditor agent runs, but it runs deeper: checking for OWASP Top 10, secrets in code, dependency vulnerabilities, and injection vectors.

Pattern 4: Continuous Quality Tracking

The verify skill stores scores in memory. Over time, you can query trends:

/ork:memory search "VerificationMetrics"

This shows how your codebase quality evolves across implementations.

Tips and Tricks

Related Skills

• /ork:implement -- Build features with built-in quality gates
• /ork:review-pr -- Review pull requests with parallel agents
• /ork:commit -- Commit verified changes
• Command Skills Reference -- All 23 command skills