Reusable AI capability
Maintain an AI Technical Claim Verification Ledger
Maintain a reusable evidence ledger for AI-generated dependency, API, framework, configuration, command, and version claims throughout software review and release.
This Skill packages a reusable way to use the linked Prompt or Workflow; Amo.ng does not run it for you.
# Maintain an AI Technical Claim Verification Ledger Skill ID: AMO-S-000013 Skill URL: https://amo.ng/skills/maintain-ai-technical-claim-verification-ledger Purpose: Give engineering teams a consistent way to prevent hallucinated packages, unsupported APIs, wrong versions, and undocumented framework behavior from becoming accepted implementation assumptions. Required inputs: - AI-generated technical claims, code changes, transcript, or completion notes - Repository scope, instruction hierarchy, manifests, lockfiles, imports, calls, and configuration - Exact runtime, language, framework, dependency, and platform versions - Available local source, type information, tests, command output, and authoritative documentation - Acceptance criteria, protected behavior, decision owner, and authorized edit or test scope How to use: When to use: - AI-assisted code introduces or relies on package, API, framework, configuration, command, or version assertions. - Technical claims must remain traceable across review iterations instead of being checked ad hoc. When not to use: - Generic code style review with no material technical assertions. - Treating model confidence, compilation alone, or a plausible package name as verification. Reusable ledger method: 1. Extract each material technical claim and link it to the code, transcript, or decision that depends on it. 2. Record the exact version and environment boundary. 3. Prefer local source, lockfiles, types, tests, runtime output, and primary documentation; label secondary evidence. 4. Classify every claim as Verified, Contradicted, Unresolved, or Unsupported. 5. Record the evidence, missing evidence, affected code, consequence, correction, and owner for each claim. 6. Keep claim state current as code, versions, or evidence changes. 7. Define the smallest correction and verification check; never mark a claim verified because a change was proposed. Expected output: A versioned technical-claim ledger, evidence links, contradictions, unresolved and unsupported claims, affected-change map, minimal corrections, verification commands, release blockers, and owner decisions. Boundaries: Do not claim files, commands, packages, APIs, tests, or external documentation were inspected when unavailable. The code owner approves changes; security or legal reviewers decide consequential package risks; the release owner controls release. Source grounding: AMO-P-000277. Applicable Workflow: AMO-W-000014. Powered by Prompt: AI-Generated Dependency and API Claim Verification Source ID: AMO-P-000277 https://amo.ng/prompts/ai-generated-dependency-and-api-claim-verification Completion criteria: Complete when every material technical assertion has an exact environment boundary, evidence reference, four-state disposition, consequence, correction or next evidence request, verification check, and accountable owner; unresolved release-critical claims remain blocking. Use this Amo.ng Skill with your preferred AI tool. Supply the required inputs and follow the usage instructions. # Maintain an AI Technical Claim Verification Ledger Skill ID: AMO-S-000013 Skill URL: https://amo.ng/skills/maintain-ai-technical-claim-verification-ledger Purpose: Give engineering teams a consistent way to prevent hallucinated packages, unsupported APIs, wrong versions, and undocumented framework behavior from becoming accepted implementation assumptions. Required inputs: - AI-generated technical claims, code changes, transcript, or completion notes - Repository scope, instruction hierarchy, manifests, lockfiles, imports, calls, and configuration - Exact runtime, language, framework, dependency, and platform versions - Available local source, type information, tests, command output, and authoritative documentation - Acceptance criteria, protected behavior, decision owner, and authorized edit or test scope How to use: When to use: - AI-assisted code introduces or relies on package, API, framework, configuration, command, or version assertions. - Technical claims must remain traceable across review iterations instead of being checked ad hoc. When not to use: - Generic code style review with no material technical assertions. - Treating model confidence, compilation alone, or a plausible package name as verification. Reusable ledger method: 1. Extract each material technical claim and link it to the code, transcript, or decision that depends on it. 2. Record the exact version and environment boundary. 3. Prefer local source, lockfiles, types, tests, runtime output, and primary documentation; label secondary evidence. 4. Classify every claim as Verified, Contradicted, Unresolved, or Unsupported. 5. Record the evidence, missing evidence, affected code, consequence, correction, and owner for each claim. 6. Keep claim state current as code, versions, or evidence changes. 7. Define the smallest correction and verification check; never mark a claim verified because a change was proposed. Expected output: A versioned technical-claim ledger, evidence links, contradictions, unresolved and unsupported claims, affected-change map, minimal corrections, verification commands, release blockers, and owner decisions. Boundaries: Do not claim files, commands, packages, APIs, tests, or external documentation were inspected when unavailable. The code owner approves changes; security or legal reviewers decide consequential package risks; the release owner controls release. Source grounding: AMO-P-000277. Applicable Workflow: AMO-W-000014. Powered by Prompt: AI-Generated Dependency and API Claim Verification Source ID: AMO-P-000277 https://amo.ng/prompts/ai-generated-dependency-and-api-claim-verification Completion criteria: Complete when every material technical assertion has an exact environment boundary, evidence reference, four-state disposition, consequence, correction or next evidence request, verification check, and accountable owner; unresolved release-critical claims remain blocking.Copy skill copies the Skill details. Use with AI adds a short instruction for your preferred AI tool; neither action runs the Skill.
Purpose
Give engineering teams a consistent way to prevent hallucinated packages, unsupported APIs, wrong versions, and undocumented framework behavior from becoming accepted implementation assumptions.
Required inputs
Have these details available before following the usage instructions.
- AI-generated technical claims, code changes, transcript, or completion notes
- Repository scope, instruction hierarchy, manifests, lockfiles, imports, calls, and configuration
- Exact runtime, language, framework, dependency, and platform versions
- Available local source, type information, tests, command output, and authoritative documentation
- Acceptance criteria, protected behavior, decision owner, and authorized edit or test scope
How to use this Skill
When to use:
- AI-assisted code introduces or relies on package, API, framework, configuration, command, or version assertions.
- Technical claims must remain traceable across review iterations instead of being checked ad hoc.
When not to use:
- Generic code style review with no material technical assertions.
- Treating model confidence, compilation alone, or a plausible package name as verification.
Reusable ledger method:
1. Extract each material technical claim and link it to the code, transcript, or decision that depends on it.
2. Record the exact version and environment boundary.
3. Prefer local source, lockfiles, types, tests, runtime output, and primary documentation; label secondary evidence.
4. Classify every claim as Verified, Contradicted, Unresolved, or Unsupported.
5. Record the evidence, missing evidence, affected code, consequence, correction, and owner for each claim.
6. Keep claim state current as code, versions, or evidence changes.
7. Define the smallest correction and verification check; never mark a claim verified because a change was proposed.
Expected output:
A versioned technical-claim ledger, evidence links, contradictions, unresolved and unsupported claims, affected-change map, minimal corrections, verification commands, release blockers, and owner decisions.
Boundaries:
Do not claim files, commands, packages, APIs, tests, or external documentation were inspected when unavailable. The code owner approves changes; security or legal reviewers decide consequential package risks; the release owner controls release. Source grounding: AMO-P-000277. Applicable Workflow: AMO-W-000014.
Powered by an Amo.ng Prompt
AI-Generated Dependency and API Claim Verification
Open the linked prompt to use the instructions that power this Skill.
Completion criteria
Complete when every material technical assertion has an exact environment boundary, evidence reference, four-state disposition, consequence, correction or next evidence request, verification check, and accountable owner; unresolved release-critical claims remain blocking.
Was this useful?
Explore related Workflows
Browse WorkflowsVerify an AI-Generated Software Change for Release
Reconcile a coding agent’s instructions and completion claims against the actual change set, verify dependency and API assertions, close test-evidence gaps, and prepare controlled release gates.
Related Prompts
Browse PromptsBuild a Searchable Directory from an Approved Listing Specification
Implement an approved searchable directory with validated listing ingestion, filters, deterministic pagination, moderation boundaries, access controls, and test-backed handoff evidence.
Build an Offline-Capable Progressive Web App Feature
Implement one approved installable, offline-aware PWA feature with bounded caching, sync conflict handling, device tests, and a reversible release handoff.
Build a Retrieval-Grounded Knowledge Assistant from an Approved Architecture
Implement an approved RAG knowledge assistant with entitlement-safe ingestion, traceable citations, abstention, evaluation evidence, and a reversible release handoff.
Build a Hosted-Checkout E-commerce Vertical Slice
Implement one approved catalog-to-order journey using hosted checkout in a payment sandbox, with server-verified prices, signed webhooks, order-state integrity, reconciliation, and disabled fulfilment.
Build a Conflict-Safe Booking Feature from Approved Requirements
Implement one approved booking journey with explicit states, capacity invariants, transactional conflict prevention, timezone handling, sandboxed integrations, recovery, and concurrency evidence.
Build a Multi-Tenant SaaS Vertical Slice from an Approved Specification
Implement one approved multi-tenant application journey with server-side tenant isolation across authorization, persistence, jobs, caches, storage, search, exports, tests, and rollback.