<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>DEV Community: Paul Redman</title>
    <description>The latest articles on DEV Community by Paul Redman (@paulredman).</description>
    <link>https://dev.to/paulredman</link>
    
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://dev.to/feed/paulredman"/>
    <language>en</language>
    <item>
      <title>Our AI verification job passed for months. It was checking the wrong branch.</title>
      <dc:creator>Paul Redman</dc:creator>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2026 07:35:19 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>https://dev.to/paulredman/our-ai-verification-job-passed-for-months-it-was-checking-the-wrong-branch-l6p</link>
      <guid>https://dev.to/paulredman/our-ai-verification-job-passed-for-months-it-was-checking-the-wrong-branch-l6p</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I run a nightly pipeline of more than 20 AI agents: research, architecture, security audit, build, QA. Every morning there's a report of what passed.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For months, everything passed.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Then I found out why. The final verification job was checking out the wrong branch. It re-tested a tree that had already passed, so it could never fail. Nothing crashed. Nothing errored. It just quietly approved the wrong thing, every night.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  The failure nobody alerts on
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Monitoring is built for things that break. A job times out, a test goes red, a deploy falls over, and someone gets paged.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This was different. The job ran, finished and reported green. Its only problem was that the green tick was about different code from the code we were shipping.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Agents make this kind of failure much more common:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;An agent reviews a file and says "pass". Ten minutes later the file changes. The pass is still sitting there.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;An agent says it checked the code against the spec. Which version of the spec?&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;An agent never produces a verdict at all, and nothing notices the gap.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In every case the verdict looks fine. It's just about the wrong bytes.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Bind the verdict to what was read
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The fix I ended up with is boring on purpose. When an agent gives a verdict, it records the SHA-256 of every file it based that verdict on:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight json"&gt;&lt;code&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;{&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
  &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nl"&gt;"schema"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s2"&gt;"slipmark/attestation@1"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;,&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
  &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nl"&gt;"by"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s2"&gt;"security-audit"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;,&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
  &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nl"&gt;"verdict"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s2"&gt;"cleared"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;,&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
  &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nl"&gt;"at"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s2"&gt;"2026-10-17T09:00:00.000Z"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;,&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
  &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nl"&gt;"subjects"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;[&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
    &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;{&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nl"&gt;"path"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s2"&gt;"src/auth/session.ts"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;,&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nl"&gt;"sha256"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s2"&gt;"9f3c…"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
  &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;]&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;}&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="w"&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;



&lt;p&gt;Before anything merges, a gate re-hashes those files and compares:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight plaintext"&gt;&lt;code&gt;Slipmark verify: 1 verified · 1 refused

  ✓ verified        review-agent verified examples/attestation/brief.md
  ✗ hash_mismatch   security-audit-agent gave "cleared" for a different version of
                    examples/attestation/spec.md. The file changed after the verdict.
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;



&lt;p&gt;If a file changed after the verdict, the verdict stops counting. If a file you require was never attested, the gate refuses. If the agent's own verdict wasn't a pass, it refuses. An empty gate is a refusal, never a silent pass.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;No model calls. Nothing to tune. Same inputs, same answer, every time.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Check content, not names
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This is the part that would have caught the original bug. The gate checks content, not names. Branch names, job names and timestamps can all be wrong without anyone noticing. A hash can't. Run the check on the exact tree you're about to merge, and a verdict produced anywhere else simply won't match.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;When I pointed it at our 23 open agent pull requests, it refused all 23.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;That was a bad morning. It was also the most useful thing the pipeline had told me in months.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  What it doesn't do
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It doesn't judge whether the agent was right. A bad review of the right file still passes. All it proves is that the verdict is about the code you're actually shipping. You still need good reviewers, human or otherwise.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It's also strict. Run a formatter after the review and the verdict stops counting, the same as any other change. For now, run formatters before the agent attests (first in your pre-commit hooks) and most of that goes away. Formatting-tolerant hashing is next, built on one rule: a false mismatch is annoying, but a false match would make the whole thing worthless.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Try it
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I've open-sourced it as Slipmark, under Apache-2.0.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight shell"&gt;&lt;code&gt;npx slipmark init
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;



&lt;p&gt;That adds an attestation folder, a GitHub workflow that starts in report-only mode, and a short block in &lt;code&gt;AGENTS.md&lt;/code&gt; (and &lt;code&gt;CLAUDE.md&lt;/code&gt;, Cursor rules or Copilot instructions if you have them) telling your coding agents how to attest. There's also a Claude Code plugin that asks Claude to re-check a file it signed off when that file changes.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;As a GitHub Action:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight yaml"&gt;&lt;code&gt;&lt;span class="pi"&gt;-&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="na"&gt;uses&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="pi"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="s"&gt;actions/checkout@v4&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;span class="pi"&gt;-&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="na"&gt;uses&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="pi"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="s"&gt;founder-ship-it/Slipmark@v0.4.0&lt;/span&gt;
  &lt;span class="na"&gt;with&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="pi"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;
    &lt;span class="na"&gt;require&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="pi"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="pi"&gt;|&lt;/span&gt;
      &lt;span class="s"&gt;specs/your-spec.md&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;



&lt;p&gt;The gate is free and needs no account. There's an optional hosted ledger if you need the record as well as the build result.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Code and docs: &lt;a href="https://github.com/founder-ship-it/Slipmark" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;github.com/founder-ship-it/Slipmark&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If you're letting agents sign off work in CI, I'd like to know how you check their verdicts are about the right code, and where this breaks for you.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
      <category>ai</category>
      <category>devops</category>
      <category>githubactions</category>
      <category>opensource</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
