Name the proof up front
A task’s validation section turns ‘make it work’ into a concrete executable check. The agent can then discover a broken command early instead of choosing a convenient substitute at the end.
Answer page
Put executable validation in the task contract, require the observed result in the implementation summary, and treat missing evidence as incomplete work.
Direct answer
Do not rely on an agent remembering to test. Declare the exact validation command before implementation, require its observed result in the implementation summary, and block acceptance when the evidence is missing, failed, or out of scope.
Practical guidance
A task’s validation section turns ‘make it work’ into a concrete executable check. The agent can then discover a broken command early instead of choosing a convenient substitute at the end.
The implementation summary should state the command run and the result observed. A claim that tests were run without the command or outcome is not sufficient review evidence.
Use reconciliation to see whether validation evidence covers each milestone criterion. If an item has no adequate evidence, keep it open for human decision or a follow-up task.
Verified demo evidence
$ npm test
1 test passed; 0 failedAuthorship and sources
Keep exploring
Make coding-agent work reviewable with bounded repository artifacts, named validation, and written implementation evidence.
Read nextA practical checklist for handing work to a coding agent and receiving reviewable implementation evidence back.
Read nextReplay a fresh Day Shift lifecycle, inspect generated artifacts, and play the implemented Tic-Tac-Toe result.
Read nextFind your answer
Search the answer pages, concept, comparisons, demo, and FAQ without leaving the site.
Search by a problem, workflow step, or tool boundary.