dan
f12dcda4d8
Ships @openprose/reactor 0.3.0, @openprose/reactor-cli 0.2.0, @openprose/reactor-devtools 0.2.0: the Reactor harness (compile-once-intelligent then dumb reconciler, content-addressed receipts, cost scales with surprise) with the distilled ideal public API — curated front door, full @openai/agents passthrough, one typed handle, one Substrate, unified observe, branded ids, and additive forward seams for the fixpoint.
2.2 KiB
name, kind
| name | kind |
|---|---|
| verifier | function |
Verifier
Check a work product against formal, objective constraints and report which checks passed and which were violated. Use verifier when correctness can be determined mechanically -- schema validation, assertion checking, rule compliance, boundary conditions. Distinct from critic, which renders subjective quality judgments.
Description
Check a result against formal constraints and report pass/fail for each.
Metadata
version: 0.1.0
Parameters
- result: the work product to verify
- constraints: formal rules the result must satisfy (as executable assertions, declarative rules, a schema, or a checklist of objective conditions)
Returns
- verification: a structured result containing:
- valid: true if all constraints pass, false if any are violated
- violations: list of failed checks, each stating which constraint failed, what the actual value was, and what was expected
- checks_passed: list of constraints that were satisfied
The returned verification partitions every constraint: each one appears in either checks_passed or violations -- none are skipped.
Errors
- unparseable-constraints: the constraints cannot be interpreted as checkable conditions
- inaccessible-result: the result is missing, empty, or in a format that cannot be inspected
Strategies
- when constraints are executable: write and run code to test assertions rather than reasoning about them
- when constraints are semantic: reason carefully and report with lower confidence, noting that the check was not mechanically verified
- when a constraint is ambiguous: check the most restrictive interpretation and note the ambiguity
- when many constraints exist: check all of them and report the full results, not just the first failure
Notes
Verifier checks formal correctness. Critic evaluates subjective quality. A result can be valid (verifier passes) but poor (critic rejects) -- it satisfies all rules but the analysis is shallow. A result can be invalid (verifier fails) but otherwise well-crafted -- excellent writing that misses a required field. Use verifier for "does this satisfy the rules?" and critic for "is this good?"