eve-verification-plans
Author agentic verification plans for Eve-compatible apps. Use when building structured test suites that verify app correctness AND Eve platform conformance — CLI parity, manifest conventions, SSO auth, managed migrations, fixture-driven ingestion, and agent efficiency.
How do I install this agent skill?
npx skills add https://github.com/incept5/eve-skillpacks --skill eve-verification-plansIs this agent skill safe to install?
- Gen Agent Trust Hubpass
This skill provides a structured framework for building and running verification plans for applications on the Eve platform. It follows security best practices by including conformance checks for hardcoded secrets and using official platform CLI tools for authentication and deployment. The identified risks are low and inherent to the skill's primary purpose of executing test scripts and processing external test data.
- Socketpass
No alerts
- Snykpass
Risk: LOW · No issues
What does this agent skill do?
Eve Verification Plans
Author agentic verification plans — markdown documents that fully specify the steps to verify an Eve-compatible app works correctly AND conforms to Eve platform conventions. Plans are actionable by humans or agents.
When to Use
- Building verification for a new Eve-compatible app
- Auditing an existing app for Eve platform conformance
- After significant feature work that needs structured validation
- Before handoff — proving the app works the Eve way, end to end
- Onboarding a new team to understand what "correctly built on Eve" looks like
Quick Start
# 1. Create the verification directory in your project
mkdir -p e2e-verification/00-smoke
# 2. Copy the smoke template
cp templates/00-smoke-test-plan.md e2e-verification/00-smoke/
# 3. Customize for your app (endpoints, services, agents)
# 4. Run it
The Six Verification Dimensions
Every Eve app has up to six dimensions to verify. Cover all that apply.
| Dimension | Tool | When | Conformance Check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platform conformance | Eve CLI + manifest inspection | Always | CLI parity, manifest conventions, secrets model |
| Service layer | Eve CLI + REST API | Always | Every endpoint reachable via CLI; no kubectl needed |
| Input / ingestion | Repo fixtures + upload commands | When app accepts files | Deterministic fixtures, real parsing flows |
| Data layer | Eve CLI + DB migrations | When app has DB | Migrations via Eve pipeline, not manual SQL |
| UI / visual | agent-browser or Playwright | When frontend exists | SSO login, dark/light mode, agent-testable |
| Agent behavior | eve job follow + optimization | When app has agents | Efficient completion, no blind alleys |
Verification Plan Format
Each scenario is a self-contained markdown document:
# Scenario NN: <Name>
**Time:** ~Nm
**Environment:** staging | local | both
**Parallel Safe:** Yes/No
**Requires:** LLM | Browser | None
<one-paragraph description>
## Prerequisites
- What must be true before running
- Required secrets, auth, prior scenarios
## Fixtures
- File paths used by this scenario
- Provenance or generation command for each
- Why these files are representative
## Setup
\```bash
# Environment detection + auth
# Project/org setup
# Fixture validation or generation
\```
## Phases
### Phase 1: <Name>
\```bash
# Commands to execute
\```
**Expected:**
- Bullet list of assertions
- Each assertion is pass/fail verifiable
### Phase 2: ...
## Success Criteria
- [ ] Checkboxes for every pass/fail assertion
- [ ] Grouped by phase
## Debugging
| Symptom | Diagnostic | Fix |
|---------|-----------|-----|
| ... | ... | ... |
## Cleanup
\```bash
# Teardown commands
\```
Format Rules
- Environment-aware: Every plan starts with environment detection —
EVE_API_URLdetermines cloud vs local - Self-contained: No assumed state beyond documented prerequisites
- Fixture-explicit: Every uploaded/imported artifact is checked in or generated from documented commands
- Phased: Break into phases that can run independently (parallel where safe)
- Assertion-driven: Every step has explicit
Expected:with pass/fail criteria - Debuggable: Troubleshooting section with symptom → diagnostic → fix
Platform Conformance Verification
Before testing functionality, verify the app is built the Eve way. Every verification suite starts with this checklist:
-
.eve/manifest.yamlexists and passeseve project sync --dry-run - Manifest follows current conventions (
namepreferred over legacyproject) - All services have health endpoints reachable via Eve ingress
- CLI can interact with every API endpoint (no "UI-only" functionality)
- Secrets managed via
eve secrets, not hardcoded or env-file-based - DB migrations run as pipeline steps, not manual scripts
- Agents (if any) defined in
agents.yamlwith harness profiles - Pipelines (if any) defined in manifest and runnable via
eve pipeline run - Frontend (if any) authenticates via Eve SSO, not custom auth
- Upload/import flows (if any) have deterministic fixtures checked in or generated locally
See references/eve-conformance-checks.md for the full checklist with rationale.
Service Layer Verification
Test every API surface CLI-first:
TOKEN=$(eve auth token --raw)
# Health check (always first)
curl -sf "${APP_SCHEME}://api.${APP_DOMAIN}/health" | jq '.'
# App API via auth token
curl -sf -H "Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN" \
"${APP_SCHEME}://api.${APP_DOMAIN}/endpoint" | jq '.field'
CLI parity assertion: For every curl call in a test plan, ask: "Can this also be done via a CLI command?" If not, file an issue — don't accept it.
Pattern:
- Eve CLI commands where they exist (deploy, env, job, secrets)
- App CLI if the app follows
eve-app-clipatterns - REST API via
curlwith auth tokens for custom endpoints - Auth: Mint tokens via
eve auth mintoreve auth token --raw
Input / Ingestion Verification
When the app accepts uploads, imports, or document bundles, verification must include a fixture plan.
Fixture Selection Order
- Reuse existing repo fixtures if they match accepted file types and are deterministic
- Manufacture synthetic fixtures locally with committed scripts
- Source small public-domain fixtures only when local manufacture would reduce realism
Fixture Matrix
- Minimal valid — smallest acceptable file that exercises the happy path
- Typical real-world — representative document/media/import file
- Boundary / invalid — wrong type, malformed structure, or size edge
- Cross-format — if the app accepts multiple types (PDF + Markdown + CSV), verify each
What to Check
- File accepted through the real app surface (CLI, REST endpoint, or browser upload)
- MIME/type detection and metadata are correct
- Storage/persistence path is correct
- Downstream processing produces expected results
- Error handling is explicit for rejected or malformed fixtures
Rule: If a plan says "upload a sample PDF", it must include an actual file path or generator step. "Find a PDF online" is not acceptable.
See references/fixture-patterns.md for detailed guidance.
UI Verification
When the app has a frontend, verify visual quality and interaction flows.
SSO Token Injection
# Mint an SSO token via CLI
SSO_TOKEN=$(eve auth mint --email user@example.com --org $ORG_ID --format sso-jwt)
# Use agent-browser with the token
agent-browser --session verify open "${APP_URL}/auth/callback?token=${SSO_TOKEN}"
agent-browser --session verify wait --url "**/dashboard"
agent-browser --session verify screenshot ./e2e-verification/artifacts/dashboard.png
What to Check
- Pages render without console errors
- Dark mode and light mode both work (screenshot both)
- Key user flows complete (login → dashboard → action → result)
- Responsive layout at standard breakpoints
- Forms submit correctly and validation fires
See references/ui-verification-patterns.md for tool choice guidance and patterns.
Agent Verification
When the app includes Eve agents, verification extends to behavior quality.
- Create a job that exercises the agent's primary workflow
- Follow execution:
eve job follow <job-id> - Check receipt:
eve job receipt <job-id>(tokens, cost, duration) - Apply
eve-agent-optimisationdiagnostic workflow - Record baseline metrics in the test plan for regression detection
What to Check
- Agent completes its task (correct output)
- Token usage within acceptable bounds
- No unnecessary tool calls or blind alleys
- Error cases handled gracefully (bad input, missing secrets)
- Multi-agent coordination works (jobs complete in dependency order)
See references/agent-verification-patterns.md for integration with optimization.
Deploy Cycle Patterns
Verification often reveals issues. The fix/deploy loop:
Cloud (Staging) — Default
discover bug → fix code → commit → tag release-v* → push tag →
wait for CI (publish-images → infra dispatch → deploy) →
re-run failed scenario
Local (k3d)
discover bug → fix code → pnpm build →
./bin/eh k8s-image push → ./bin/eh k8s deploy →
re-run failed scenario
See references/deploy-cycle-patterns.md for environment detection and wait patterns.
Scenario Discovery
How to identify what scenarios to create for a given app:
- Read the manifest — every service is a verification target
- Read agents config — every agent needs a behavioral test
- Read the API spec — every endpoint group is a potential scenario
- Check upload/import surfaces — every accepted file class needs fixtures
- Check pipelines — build/deploy/workflow pipelines need end-to-end verification
- Check the UI — every page/route needs visual verification
- Check integrations — webhooks, chat gateways, external APIs
Minimum Scenario Set
| Scenario | Required | What It Covers |
|---|---|---|
00-smoke | Always | Health, auth, connectivity + Eve conformance checklist |
01-deploy | Always | Build, release, deploy via pipeline, verify endpoints |
02-core-flow | Always | Primary user journey end-to-end (CLI + API) |
03-ui-visual | If frontend | Screenshot verification, SSO login, dark/light mode |
04-input-ingestion | If uploads/imports | Fixture upload, parsing, storage, error handling |
05-data-layer | If database | Migrations via pipeline, schema correct, data integrity |
06-agent-execution | If agents | Agents complete primary tasks correctly |
07-agent-optimization | If agents | Baseline metrics + optimization pass |
08-pipeline-flows | If pipelines | Each pipeline runs end-to-end, steps succeed in order |
Running Verification Plans
Sequential Execution
# Run scenarios in order
for plan in e2e-verification/*/; do
echo "=== Running: $plan ==="
# Agent reads and executes the plan document
done
Parallel Execution
Scenarios marked Parallel Safe: Yes can run concurrently. Typically:
00-smokeruns first (validates prerequisites)01-deploythrough03-ui-visualcan parallelize- Agent scenarios (
06-07) depend on deploy completing
CI Integration
# In CI, set environment and run
export EVE_API_URL=https://api.eve.example.com
eve auth login --email $CI_EMAIL --ssh-key $CI_SSH_KEY
# Run all scenarios, collect artifacts
mkdir -p e2e-verification/artifacts
# Agent executes each plan, screenshots/logs go to artifacts/
File Structure
<project-root>/
e2e-verification/
README.md # Index of all scenarios
00-smoke/
00-smoke-test-plan.md
01-deploy/
01-deploy-test-plan.md
02-core-flow/
02-core-flow-test-plan.md
fixtures/
README.md
test-data.json
03-ui-visual/
03-ui-visual-test-plan.md
04-input-ingestion/
04-input-ingestion-test-plan.md
fixtures/
README.md
sample-document.pdf
sample-import.csv
scripts/
make-fixtures.sh
artifacts/ # Generated during runs (gitignored)
Numbering: NN-kebab-name/ directories with matching NN-kebab-name-test-plan.md. Numbers imply execution order. Gaps are fine — they allow insertion without renaming.
Fixtures: Every scenario that depends on uploaded or imported inputs gets a sibling fixtures/ directory. fixtures/README.md records provenance, generation steps, and sensitivity notes.
References
references/test-plan-format.md— Full format specification with annotated examplesreferences/eve-conformance-checks.md— The Eve way: what to verify and whyreferences/fixture-patterns.md— Fixture sourcing, manufacture, and documentationreferences/deploy-cycle-patterns.md— Fix/deploy loop for cloud and localreferences/ui-verification-patterns.md— Browser automation and SSO auth patternsreferences/agent-verification-patterns.md— Agent testing and optimization integration
Templates
templates/00-smoke-test-plan.md— Starter smoke + conformance templatetemplates/scenario-test-plan.md— General scenario skeletontemplates/upload-ingest-test-plan.md— Input-heavy scenario with fixture matrix
Related Skills
| Skill | Relationship |
|---|---|
eve-agent-optimisation | Called from agent verification scenarios |
eve-web-ui-testing-agent-browser | UI verification tool |
eve-deploy-debugging | Deploy cycle troubleshooting |
eve-cli-primitives | CLI commands used in service-layer tests |
eve-manifest-authoring | Manifest conventions that conformance checks validate |
eve-app-cli | App CLI patterns — verification asserts CLI parity |
eve-pipelines-workflows | Pipeline conventions tested by pipeline scenarios |
eve-auth-and-secrets | Auth + secrets model validated by conformance checks |
eve-troubleshooting | General debugging when verification fails |
eve-read-eve-docs | Reference source for current CLI/manifest/auth behavior |
eve-agent-native-design | Design principles encoded in conformance checks |
How can the creator link this skill?
Add the canonical catalog link to the repository README so users can inspect current installs and available audits. The publishing guide covers the complete discovery path.
<a href="https://skillzs.dev/skills/incept5/eve-skillpacks/eve-verification-plans">View eve-verification-plans on skillZs</a>