Tawfeeq Abuirqeba appeals the district court’s 1 order affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We find that the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) opinion is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Myers v. Colvin, 721 F.3d 521, 524 (8th Cir. 2013) (de novo review). Contrary to Abuirqeba’s assertions, the ALJ’s credibility determination is supported by good reasons and substantial evidence, and thus it is entitled to deference, see McDade v. Astrue, 720 F.3d 994, 998 (8th Cir. 2013); the ALJ was not required to develop the record further, see McCoy v. Astrue, 648 F.3d 605, 612 (8th Cir. 2011) (ALJ has duty to develop record but it is not never-ending, and ALJ is not required to disprove every possible impairment; medical examinations and tests are required only if medical records before ALJ lack sufficient evidence to determine if claimant is disabled); Pena v. Chater, 76 F.3d 906, 909 (8th Cir. 1996) (there is no obligation to investígate claim not presented in application or offered at hearing as basis for disability); we find no inconsistencies in the ALJ’s findings on Abuirqe-ba’s abilities to stand and walk; and we *616 find no error in the ALJ’s determination that Abuirqeba was literate and able to communicate in basic English. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.