Pre-implementation validation requiring ≥90% confidence before coding. Prevents wrong-direction work by assessing duplicates, architecture alignment, and root cause understanding.
Install
npx skillscat add kimasplund/clawdbot-skills-pack/confidence-check Install via the SkillsCat registry.
Confidence Check
Pre-implementation validation framework. Never code at < 90% confidence.
Why This Matters
Wrong-direction work costs 5K-50K tokens to undo. A 2-minute confidence check saves hours of rework.
The 90% Rule
Before implementing ANY significant change:
Confidence < 70% → STOP. Research more.
Confidence 70-89% → PAUSE. Fill gaps first.
Confidence ≥ 90% → PROCEED with implementation.Confidence Checklist
1. Duplicate Check (20 points)
- Searched codebase for existing solution
- Checked if similar pattern exists elsewhere
- Verified not reinventing existing functionality
2. Architecture Alignment (20 points)
- Understand where this fits in the system
- Know which files/modules are affected
- Approach matches existing patterns
3. Requirements Clarity (20 points)
- Clear on what success looks like
- Understand edge cases
- Know acceptance criteria
4. Root Cause Understanding (20 points)
- If fixing bug: know WHY it happens
- If adding feature: know WHY it's needed
- Understand the problem, not just symptoms
5. Implementation Path (20 points)
- Know the steps to implement
- Identified potential blockers
- Have fallback approach
Scoring
Score each category 0-20:
- 0-5: No understanding
- 6-10: Partial understanding
- 11-15: Good understanding, some gaps
- 16-20: Full understanding
Total = sum of all categories (0-100)Output Template
## Confidence Check: [Task]
### Assessment
| Category | Score | Notes |
|----------|-------|-------|
| Duplicate Check | /20 | |
| Architecture | /20 | |
| Requirements | /20 | |
| Root Cause | /20 | |
| Implementation | /20 | |
| **TOTAL** | **/100** | |
### Gaps Identified
- [ ] [gap 1 - how to fill]
- [ ] [gap 2 - how to fill]
### Verdict
**[PROCEED / RESEARCH MORE / STOP]**
### If RESEARCH MORE:
1. [specific question to answer]
2. [file to read]
3. [person to ask]Quick Check (30 seconds)
For small changes, ask yourself:
- Have I read the code I'm changing? (Y/N)
- Do I know why this change is needed? (Y/N)
- Do I know how to test it works? (Y/N)
All Y → Proceed
Any N → Pause and fill the gap
When to Skip
- Typo fixes
- Comment updates
- Obvious one-liners
- Explicitly requested by user with full context
Anti-Patterns
❌ "I'll figure it out as I go"
❌ "This looks similar to something I did before"
❌ "The user asked for it so it must be right"
❌ "I'll just try this and see"
✅ "I understand the problem and solution"
✅ "I've verified no existing solution"
✅ "I know exactly what files to change"