docs: gate README claims against live evidence (claim-verification) - #42
Merged
Conversation
Audited this repo's load-bearing claims after the badge fix (#36/#38) and the Gappa/Flocq/Coq-Interval toolchain feature (#37/#41): - Found the footer tagline still carried the retired flat-verification overclaim ("formally verified WebAssembly toolchain for safety-critical systems") -- the same overclaim #36 fixed in the badge, just relocated, and factually wrong on top (this repo has nothing to do with WebAssembly). Replaced with an accurate description. - Toolchain Contents table and Examples section were stale after #41 -- didn't mention Flocq/Coq-Interval/Coquelicot/Gappa or examples/gappa_proof. Updated both. - Added claims.yaml + tools/claim_check.py (the claim-verification skill's reference implementation): each load-bearing README claim is bound to a predicate re-derived from the actual source (file-exists, count-min, count-max on the retired overclaims) rather than trusted as prose. - Wired `claim-check` into CI as its own job: a stale or overclaiming README now fails the build the same way an un-kernel-checked proof fails a rocq_proof_test. All 5 claims pass against current main: `python3 tools/claim_check.py claims.yaml` -> 5/5. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011MptgyfLZuHYCbfpq1zDey
The self-hosted smithy runners are Debian/python3.12 with PEP 668's externally-managed-environment guard, which refuses a bare pip install. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011MptgyfLZuHYCbfpq1zDey
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Audited this repo's load-bearing claims per the PulseEngine claim-verification skill, after the badge fix (#36/#38) and the Gappa/Flocq/Coq-Interval toolchain feature (#37/#41).
Found:
examples/gappa_proof. Updated both.Added:
claims.yaml+tools/claim_check.py— each load-bearing README claim bound to a predicate re-derived from the actual source (file-exists,count-min,count-maxon the retired overclaims), not trusted as prose.claim-checkCI job: a stale or overclaiming README now fails the build the same way an un-kernel-checked proof fails arocq_proof_test.Test plan
python3 tools/claim_check.py claims.yaml→ 5/5 claims holdbazel test //examples/gappa_proof:rounding_bound_test— still PASSED on current mainrivet validate— still PASS🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_011MptgyfLZuHYCbfpq1zDey