SKILL.md
$27
Restart shell, then verify
lake --version
First run of `/prove` will download Mathlib (~2GB) via `lake build`.
## Usage
/prove every group homomorphism preserves identity
/prove Monsky's theorem
/prove continuous functions on compact sets are uniformly continuous
## The 5-Phase Workflow
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 📚 RESEARCH → 🏗️ DESIGN → 🧪 TEST → ⚙️ IMPLEMENT → ✅ VERIFY │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
### Phase 1: RESEARCH (before any Lean)
**Goal:** Understand if/how this can be formalized.
1. **Search Mathlib with Loogle** (PRIMARY - type-aware search)
```bash
# Use loogle for type signature search - finds lemmas by shape
loogle-search "pattern_here"
# Examples:
loogle-search "Nontrivial _ ↔ _" # Find Nontrivial lemmas
loogle-search "(?a → ?b) → List ?a → List ?b" # Map-like functions
loogle-search "IsCyclic, center" # Multiple concepts
Query syntax:
_= any single type
?a,?b= type variables (same var = same type)
Foo, Bar= must mention both
-
Search External - What's the known proof strategy?
- Use Nia MCP if available:
mcp__nia__search
- Use Perplexity MCP if available:
mcp__perplexity__search
- Fall back to WebSearch for papers/references
- Check: Is there an existing formalization elsewhere (Coq, Isabelle)?
-
Identify Obstacles
- What lemmas are NOT in Mathlib?
- Does proof require axioms beyond ZFC? (Choice, LEM, etc.)
- Is the statement even true? (search for counterexamples)
-
Output: Brief summary of proof strategy and obstacles
CHECKPOINT: If obstacles found, use AskUserQuestion:
- "This requires [X]. Options: (a) restricted version, (b) accept axiom, (c) abort"
Phase 2: DESIGN (skeleton with sorries)
Goal: Build proof structure before filling details.
-
Create Lean file with:
- Imports
- Definitions needed
- Main theorem statement
- Helper lemmas as
sorry
-
Annotate each sorry:
-- SORRY: needs proof (straightforward)
-- SORRY: needs proof (complex - ~50 lines)
-- AXIOM CANDIDATE: v₂ constraint - will test in Phase 3
-
Verify skeleton compiles (with sorries)
Output: proofs/<theorem_name>.lean with annotated structure
Phase 3: TEST (counterexample search)
Goal: Catch false lemmas BEFORE trying to prove them.
For each AXIOM CANDIDATE sorry:
-
Generate test cases
-- Create #eval or example statements
#eval testLemma (randomInput1) -- should return true
#eval testLemma (randomInput2) -- should return true
-
Run tests
lake env lean test_lemmas.lean
-
If counterexample found:
- Report the counterexample
- Use AskUserQuestion: "Lemma is FALSE. Options: (a) restrict domain, (b) reformulate, (c) abort"
CHECKPOINT: Only proceed if all axiom candidates pass testing.
Phase 4: IMPLEMENT (fill sorries)
Goal: Complete the proofs.
Standard iteration loop:
- Pick a sorry
- Write proof attempt
- Compiler-in-the-loop checks (hook fires automatically)
- If error, Godel-Prover suggests fixes
- Iterate until sorry is filled
- Repeat for all sorries
Tools active:
- compiler-in-the-loop hook (on every Write)
- Godel-Prover suggestions (on errors)
Phase 5: VERIFY (audit)
Goal: Confirm proof quality.
-
Axiom Audit
lake build && grep "depends on axioms" output
- Standard: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound ✓
- Custom axioms: LIST EACH ONE
-
Sorry Count
grep -c "sorry" proofs/<file>.lean
- Must be 0 for "complete" proof
-
Generate Summary
✓ MACHINE VERIFIED (or ⚠️ PARTIAL - N axioms)
Theorem: <statement>
Proof Strategy: <brief description>
Proved:
- <lemma 1>
- <lemma 2>
Axiomatized (if any):
- <axiom>: <why it's needed>
File: proofs/<name>.lean
Research Tool Priority
Use whatever's available, in order:
Tool
Best For
Command
Loogle
Type signature search (PRIMARY)
loogle-search "pattern"
Nia MCP
Library documentation
mcp__nia__search
Perplexity MCP
Proof strategies, papers
mcp__perplexity__search
WebSearch
General references
WebSearch tool
WebFetch
Specific paper/page content
WebFetch tool
Loogle setup: Requires ~/tools/loogle with Mathlib index. Run loogle-server & for fast queries.
If no search tools available, proceed with caution and note "research phase skipped".
Checkpoints (automatic)
The workflow pauses for user input when:
- ⚠️ Research finds obstacles
- ❌ Testing finds counterexamples
- 🔄 Implementation hits unfillable sorry after N attempts
Output Format
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ✓ MACHINE VERIFIED │
│ │
│ Theorem: ∀ φ : G →* H, φ(1_G) = 1_H │
│ │
│ Proof Strategy: Direct application of │
│ MonoidHom.map_one from Mathlib. │
│ │
│ Phases: │
│ 📚 Research: Found in Mathlib.Algebra.Group.Hom │
│ 🏗️ Design: Single lemma, no sorries needed │
│ 🧪 Test: N/A (trivial) │
│ ⚙️ Implement: 3 lines │
│ ✅ Verify: 0 custom axioms, 0 sorries │
│ │
│ File: proofs/group_hom_identity.lean │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
What I Can Prove
Domain
Examples
Category Theory
Functors, natural transformations, Yoneda
Abstract Algebra
Groups, rings, homomorphisms
Topology
Continuity, compactness, connectedness
Analysis
Limits, derivatives, integrals
Logic
Propositional, first-order
Limitations
- Complex proofs may take multiple iterations
- Novel research-level proofs may exceed capabilities
- Some statements are unprovable over ℚ (need ℝ extension)
Behind The Scenes
- Lean 4.26.0 - Theorem prover
- Mathlib - 100K+ formalized theorems
- Godel-Prover - AI tactic suggestions (via LMStudio)
- Compiler-in-the-loop - Automatic verification on every write
- Research tools - Nia, Perplexity, WebSearch (graceful degradation)
See Also
/loogle-search- Search Mathlib by type signature (used in Phase 1 RESEARCH)
/math-router- For computation (integrals, equations)
/lean4- Direct Lean syntax access