eve-verification-plans
Original:🇺🇸 English
Translated
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.
2installs
Sourceincept5/eve-skillpacks
Added on
NPX Install
npx skill4agent add incept5/eve-skillpacks eve-verification-plansTags
Translated version includes tags in frontmatterSKILL.md Content
View Translation Comparison →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
bash
# 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 itThe 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 | | When app has agents | Efficient completion, no blind alleys |
Verification Plan Format
Each scenario is a self-contained markdown document:
markdown
# 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 — determines cloud vs local
EVE_API_URL - 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 with pass/fail criteria
Expected: - 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:
- exists and passes
.eve/manifest.yamleve project sync --dry-run - Manifest follows current conventions (preferred over legacy
name)project - All services have health endpoints reachable via Eve ingress
- CLI can interact with every API endpoint (no "UI-only" functionality)
- Secrets managed via , not hardcoded or env-file-based
eve secrets - DB migrations run as pipeline steps, not manual scripts
- Agents (if any) defined in with harness profiles
agents.yaml - 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 for the full checklist with rationale.
references/eve-conformance-checks.mdService Layer Verification
Test every API surface CLI-first:
bash
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.${APP_DOMAIN}/endpoint" | jq '.field'CLI parity assertion: For every call in a test plan, ask: "Can this also be done via a CLI command?" If not, file an issue — don't accept it.
curlPattern:
- Eve CLI commands where they exist (deploy, env, job, secrets)
- App CLI if the app follows patterns
eve-app-cli - REST API via with auth tokens for custom endpoints
curl - Auth: Mint tokens via or
eve auth minteve auth token --raw
Input / Ingestion Verification
When the app accepts uploads, imports, or document bundles, verification must include a fixture plan.
Fixture Selection Order
- Reuse existing repo fixtures if they match accepted file types and are deterministic
- Manufacture synthetic fixtures locally with committed scripts
- Source small public-domain fixtures only when local manufacture would reduce realism
Fixture Matrix
- Minimal valid — smallest acceptable file that exercises the happy path
- Typical real-world — representative document/media/import file
- Boundary / invalid — wrong type, malformed structure, or size edge
- Cross-format — if the app accepts multiple types (PDF + Markdown + CSV), verify each
What to Check
- File accepted through the real app surface (CLI, REST endpoint, or browser upload)
- MIME/type detection and metadata are correct
- Storage/persistence path is correct
- Downstream processing produces expected results
- Error handling is explicit for rejected or malformed fixtures
Rule: If a plan says "upload a sample PDF", it must include an actual file path or generator step. "Find a PDF online" is not acceptable.
See for detailed guidance.
references/fixture-patterns.mdUI Verification
When the app has a frontend, verify visual quality and interaction flows.
SSO Token Injection
bash
# Mint an SSO token via CLI
SSO_TOKEN=$(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.pngWhat 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 for tool choice guidance and patterns.
references/ui-verification-patterns.mdAgent 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: (tokens, cost, duration)
eve job receipt <job-id> - Apply diagnostic workflow
eve-agent-optimisation - 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 for integration with optimization.
references/agent-verification-patterns.mdDeploy 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 scenarioLocal (k3d)
discover bug → fix code → pnpm build →
./bin/eh k8s-image push → ./bin/eh k8s deploy →
re-run failed scenarioSee for environment detection and wait patterns.
references/deploy-cycle-patterns.mdScenario 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Always | Health, auth, connectivity + Eve conformance checklist |
| Always | Build, release, deploy via pipeline, verify endpoints |
| Always | Primary user journey end-to-end (CLI + API) |
| If frontend | Screenshot verification, SSO login, dark/light mode |
| If uploads/imports | Fixture upload, parsing, storage, error handling |
| If database | Migrations via pipeline, schema correct, data integrity |
| If agents | Agents complete primary tasks correctly |
| If agents | Baseline metrics + optimization pass |
| If pipelines | Each pipeline runs end-to-end, steps succeed in order |
Running Verification Plans
Sequential Execution
bash
# Run scenarios in order
for plan in e2e-verification/*/; do
echo "=== Running: $plan ==="
# Agent reads and executes the plan document
doneParallel Execution
Scenarios marked can run concurrently. Typically:
Parallel Safe: Yes- runs first (validates prerequisites)
00-smoke - through
01-deploycan parallelize03-ui-visual - Agent scenarios () depend on deploy completing
06-07
CI Integration
bash
# In CI, set environment and run
export EVE_API_URL=https://api.eh1.incept5.dev
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: directories with matching . Numbers imply execution order. Gaps are fine — they allow insertion without renaming.
NN-kebab-name/NN-kebab-name-test-plan.mdFixtures: Every scenario that depends on uploaded or imported inputs gets a sibling directory. records provenance, generation steps, and sensitivity notes.
fixtures/fixtures/README.mdReferences
- — Full format specification with annotated examples
references/test-plan-format.md - — The Eve way: what to verify and why
references/eve-conformance-checks.md - — Fixture sourcing, manufacture, and documentation
references/fixture-patterns.md - — Fix/deploy loop for cloud and local
references/deploy-cycle-patterns.md - — Browser automation and SSO auth patterns
references/ui-verification-patterns.md - — Agent testing and optimization integration
references/agent-verification-patterns.md
Templates
- — Starter smoke + conformance template
templates/00-smoke-test-plan.md - — General scenario skeleton
templates/scenario-test-plan.md - — Input-heavy scenario with fixture matrix
templates/upload-ingest-test-plan.md
Related Skills
| Skill | Relationship |
|---|---|
| Called from agent verification scenarios |
| UI verification tool |
| Deploy cycle troubleshooting |
| CLI commands used in service-layer tests |
| Manifest conventions that conformance checks validate |
| App CLI patterns — verification asserts CLI parity |
| Pipeline conventions tested by pipeline scenarios |
| Auth + secrets model validated by conformance checks |
| General debugging when verification fails |
| Reference source for current CLI/manifest/auth behavior |
| Design principles encoded in conformance checks |