Self-Audit Checklist

The self-audit checklist defines how work should be self-reviewed before claiming completion. It covers ten areas: intended outcome, constraints applied, decision rules followed, verification performed, evidence produced, document structure validation, UX and behavior check, tradeoffs and risks, maintainability check, and confidence level. Minimum acceptable completion requires a stated outcome, at least one verification step, at least one piece of evidence, and acknowledgment of tradeoffs or unknowns. This replaces repeated back-and-forth questions about whether work was actually run and verified.

Canon v0.1

This is the reflection and enforcement layer that makes the Definition of Done actionable without turning you into a QA manager.

This checklist defines how I expect work to be self-reviewed before it is considered complete.

The purpose is not bureaucracy.
The purpose is to catch obvious failures before someone else does.

Every completed task must include a filled version of this checklist.

I expect builders—human or AI—to audit their own work against stated outcomes, constraints, and evidence.

If an item cannot be answered, that is a signal—not a failure.

1. Intended Outcome

• What outcome was this work intended to achieve?
• How will someone know if that outcome was achieved?

2. Constraints Applied

• Which constraints were relevant to this task?
• (e.g., offline-first, maintainability, interoperability)
• Were any default constraints intentionally overridden?
• If yes, why?

3. Decision Rules Followed

• Which decision rules guided the approach?
• (e.g., Borrow→Bend→Break→Beget→Build (canon/methods/borrow-bend-break-beget-build.md), KISS, explicit tradeoffs)
• Were there moments where a different rule could have been applied?
• Why was it not?

4. Verification Performed

• What was run or exercised to verify the work?
• What behavior was directly observed?

5. Evidence Produced

• What evidence proves the behavior occurred?
  • screenshots
  • recordings
  • logs
  • rendered output
• Where can this evidence be found?

5b. Document Structure Check (If Applicable)

If the deliverable is a document targeting canon/, odd/, or docs/:

• Does it pass the Writing Canon checklist (canon/meta/writing-canon.md)?
• Does the blockquote contain the full compressed argument?
• Is the Summary section self-contained?
• Do headers tell the story when read in sequence?
• Could an agent act on title + blockquote alone?

6. UX & Behavior Check (If Applicable)

• Does the UI or interaction behave as expected?
• Is the behavior understandable without explanation?
• If explanation is required, is that a UX smell?

7. Tradeoffs & Risks

• What tradeoffs were made?
• What risks remain?
• What assumptions could be wrong?

8. Maintainability Check

• Would someone else understand this in six months?
• What would be the hardest part to maintain or change?

9. Confidence Level

• How confident am I that this works as intended?
• What would increase confidence further?

At a minimum, a completed task must include:
• a stated outcome
• at least one verification step
• at least one piece of evidence
• acknowledgment of tradeoffs or unknowns

If these are missing, the task is not complete.

This checklist is not:
• a justification exercise
• a sales pitch
• a guarantee of correctness

It is a thinking aid designed to surface problems early.

Agents and collaborators are expected to:
• fill this checklist before claiming completion
• be concise (one sentence per item is often enough)
• explicitly state uncertainty instead of hiding it

If an agent cannot complete the checklist honestly, the correct action is to continue working or mark the task incomplete.

When the deliverable is a canon document, six checks must pass before it is considered done. This preflight supplements the self-audit — it does not replace it.

1. Progressive disclosure — Writing Canon checklist (canon/meta/writing-canon.md): blockquote with complete compressed argument, self-contained summary, descriptive headers, no buried claims.
2. Drift audit — What existing documents does this create tension with? For each: amend, acknowledge, or investigate. See canon/values/drift.md.
3. Cross-reference integrity — Bidirectional links verified. derives_from, complements, and governs fields are accurate and reciprocated where appropriate.
4. Downstream amendments — Existing documents that should now reference the new document have been updated.
5. Frontmatter completeness — YAML metadata includes URI, title, audience, exposure, tier, voice, stability, tags, epoch, date, and relationship fields as applicable.
6. Self-audit — This ten-item checklist, completed honestly.

This checklist exists to replace repeated back-and-forth questions like:
• “Did you actually run it?”
• “Did you verify this visually?”
• “Why did you choose this approach?”

Those questions should already be answered here.

• Canon v0.1 — Self-Audit Checklist complete
• Ready to proceed to Canon v0.1 — Visual Proof Standards