lean-proofcheck

Run Lean proofs through a checker and report pass/fail verdicts with evidence logs.

Updated Sep 11, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/JYeswak/grok_bot_playground --skill lean-proofcheck-jyeswak
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: lean-proofcheck
Source: https://github.com/JYeswak/grok_bot_playground/tree/main/plugin/skills/lean-proofcheck
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/JYeswak/grok_bot_playground --skill lean-proofcheck-jyeswak

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Claims that a Lean proof "typechecks" often travel without the checker output that would prove it, making verified results indistinguishable from bare assertions. This Skill runs a proof through a local Lean checker and reports the verdict with the full evidence chain intact. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Evidence-backed verdicts: Every pass/fail is quoted against raw checker output, with the checker version and dependency set recorded so the context of the check is never ambiguous. - Two-proof comparison: Check two proofs side by side while keeping each proof's chain of statement, dependencies, and result strictly separate. - Gap labeling: Unchecked spans, assumed lemmas, sorry placeholders, and version mismatches are labeled UNKNOWN rather than smoothed over. - Use Case: Before relying on a formal claim in a paper or codebase, freeze the proof file, run it through the checker in a fixed context, and receive a report with the raw verdict, diagnostics excerpt, and the single most consequential gap. ## Quick Start Check the attached Lean proof file and report whether it passes, including the checker version, dependencies, and any gaps.

Frequently Asked Questions about lean-proofcheck

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I verify a Lean proof actually checks?▼

Freeze the proof's statement, file version, and declared dependencies, then run the file through a Lean checker in a fixed context. Report the raw verdict with diagnostics, quoting the checker output rather than paraphrasing it.

How to compare two Lean proofs side by side?▼

Check each proof separately with its own frozen statement, dependencies, and checker context, keeping the two evidence chains distinct. The comparison cites each side individually and never shares a verdict or claim across proofs without evidence on both.

Does the checker version affect a Lean proof verification?▼

Yes. A different checker version or dependency set is a different check, so both must be recorded before running. A result under one context is never reported with the confidence of a check run under another.

What happens if a Lean proof contains sorry placeholders?▼

A proof containing sorry or placeholders is flagged during the freeze step and labeled as a finding, not reported as verified. Anything unchecked, assumed, or version-mismatched is marked UNKNOWN with the reason stated.

Can this verify a proof without access to its dependencies?▼

No. If a required dependency, library, or credential is unavailable, it is recorded as unreachable and the gap is reported rather than worked around. Access is never improvised and no configuration values are exposed.

When should I not use automated Lean proof checking?▼

Do not use it to write proofs from scratch, audit informal mathematics, or certify correctness publicly. Checking only reports what the checker output shows for a specific file, version, and dependency set on the day of the run.