This product was not featured by Product Hunt yet. It will not be visible on their landing page and won't be ranked (cannot win product of the day regardless of upvotes).
Product upvotes vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product comments vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvote speed vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvotes and comments
Waiting for data. Loading
Product vs the next 3
Loading
ProveDone
Prove your agent actually did the work
Two failure modes break unattended pipelines, and neither looks like an error. Silent failure: exits 0, produced nothing. False failure: the work finished, then cleanup crashed and it reported failure. ProveDone runs your command, then checks the artifacts on disk - existence, size, count, freshness, and whether this run actually created them. That last one is what everyone gets wrong. A stale artifact passes every naive "does the file exist" check ever written. No dependencies. Node 18+. MIT.
I built this after a single day where an unattended pipeline hit three false failures.
A publisher posted successfully, then verified the post by rebuilding the URL with the month hardcoded. On September 1st every publish reported 404. Publishing worked perfectly - the check was broken.
An image job produced 43 of 45 files, then threw EPERM deleting its own temp folder because a child process still held a handle. Exit code 1. The 43 files were thrown away and the fallback never ran.
A verification step fetched an image with no timeout and hung the whole gate for hours. A hung gate is worse than a failed one - a failure alerts you, a hang just stops.
Every one of them was the tool lying about the work. After enough of those you stop trusting your own gates, which is exactly when a real failure walks straight through.
So ProveDone ignores the exit code as the source of truth and looks at what is actually on disk. Four verdicts: PASS, SILENT_FAILURE, FALSE_FAILURE, FAILURE. FALSE_FAILURE deliberately exits 0 - if the artifacts are there, a crash in rm -rf tmp/ should not cost you a re-run.
It ships with a self-check that reproduces all four verdicts, five ready-made gate configs, and a playbook of the failure patterns.
Would genuinely like to hear which of these you have been bitten by. I suspect the stale-artifact one is more common than anyone admits.
About ProveDone on Product Hunt
“Prove your agent actually did the work”
ProveDone was submitted on Product Hunt and earned 0 upvotes and 2 comments, placing #149 on the daily leaderboard. Two failure modes break unattended pipelines, and neither looks like an error. Silent failure: exits 0, produced nothing. False failure: the work finished, then cleanup crashed and it reported failure. ProveDone runs your command, then checks the artifacts on disk - existence, size, count, freshness, and whether this run actually created them. That last one is what everyone gets wrong. A stale artifact passes every naive "does the file exist" check ever written. No dependencies. Node 18+. MIT.
On the analytics side, ProveDone competes within Developer Tools and Artificial Intelligence — topics that collectively have 997.1k followers on Product Hunt. The dashboard above tracks how ProveDone performed against the three products that launched closest to it on the same day.
Who hunted ProveDone?
ProveDone was hunted by ProveDone. A “hunter” on Product Hunt is the community member who submits a product to the platform — uploading the images, the link, and tagging the makers behind it. Hunters typically write the first comment explaining why a product is worth attention, and their followers are notified the moment they post. Around 79% of featured launches on Product Hunt are self-hunted by their makers, but a well-known hunter still acts as a signal of quality to the rest of the community. See the full all-time top hunters leaderboard to discover who is shaping the Product Hunt ecosystem.
For a complete overview of ProveDone including community comment highlights and product details, visit the product overview.
ProveDone