القائمة
Test-first bug-fix workflow — write a failing regression test before any code change, fix minimally, then verify. Use when fixing a defect in this codebase.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
| name | bug-fix |
| description | Test-first bug-fix workflow — write a failing regression test before any code change, fix minimally, then verify. Use when fixing a defect in this codebase. |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
You are about to fix a bug. Follow these steps IN ORDER. DO NOT skip steps.
STOP: Before writing ANY code to fix the bug, you MUST:
Read the valuable unit test skill:
.claude/skills/valuable-unit-tests/SKILL.mdCreate a TodoWrite entry:
in_progressWrite a test that FAILS:
Run the test to confirm it FAILS:
TZ=UTC npx vitest run path/to/test.test.jsMark the todo as completed
Create a TodoWrite entry:
in_progressMake the minimal change:
Mark the todo as completed after the next step
Run the regression test:
Run the full test suite:
npm test to ensure no regressionsDocument the fix (optional):
NO BUG IS FIXED WITHOUT A TEST.
If you find yourself wanting to skip the test:
When you start a bug fix, your todos should look like:
1. Write regression test for [bug] (in_progress)
2. Fix [bug] (pending)
Then:
1. Write regression test for [bug] (completed)
2. Fix [bug] (in_progress)
Then:
1. Write regression test for [bug] (completed)
2. Fix [bug] (completed)
Extract delivery stories from a design conversation or document. Strip the conversation of noise, Example Map each decision, sequence by dependency and walking skeleton, write feature README and story files using the project template.
Reviews proposed implementation stories as a senior/principal engineer. Use after an initial product/technical discussion has produced one or more draft stories, before implementation begins. Focuses on story slicing, codebase evidence, technical design, sequencing, refactoring, assumptions, and implementation risk.
Editorial review and writing process for documents that humans will read - PR descriptions, READMEs, design docs, commit bodies, RFCs. Recursively drills from surface text to essence by asking what we're trying to say and why; includes a style guide of mechanical rules. Use when the user asks to review, sharpen, edit, or write a doc.
Rigorous agent-driven story implementation workflow — explore, plan, then test-first per module with qa-test-planner, code-reviewer, and refactoring-enforcer gates. Use when implementing a feature/story file from features/.
Reviews implementation stories from a QA/test strategy perspective. Use after stories have been shaped by product and engineering. Focuses on valuable tests, regression risk, testability, acceptance criteria, fixtures, automation, and how tests should be run.
Enforce rigor in technical analysis reports intended for another AI to consume — show raw data before interpretation, define domain terms with contrasting examples, prevent jargon and hallucination. Use when producing data-analysis reports or research summaries with quantitative claims.