Menu
Reproduce and fix reported bugs with test-first verification and root-cause analysis. Use when debugging a defect, investigating unexpected behavior, triaging a regression, or implementing a minimal corrective fix.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Re-analyze the template/ folder for internal consistency, keep template/structure.md (an annotated map of the template layout) up to date, and keep the meta/skill-list.md index in sync with the template skills. Use when checking template consistency, after adding/renaming/removing files under template/, when verifying internal links and skill tables resolve, or when asked to "run the maintainer", "check the template", "audit the template", or "update the template structure". Do NOT use for ingesting external sources (use ingest-link) or for editing project content unrelated to template consistency.
Author, update, or remove a Claude Code skill inside the template (template/.claude/skills/), following meta/skill-guide.md as the design rubric, and keep the meta/skill-list.md index table in sync. Use when asked to create a new template skill, write a skill, add a skill to the template, update or rename an existing template skill, or regenerate the template skill list. Do NOT use to author authoring-repo skills under the root .claude/skills/ (those are not part of the template product).
Ingest an external URL as a knowledge source: fetch and analyse it, record an entry in knowledge/links.md, write detailed notes under knowledge/sources/, then patch the affected template docs and structure. Use when a new article, paper, blog post, documentation page, or talk transcript should inform the harness engineering template, or when the user provides a URL to "ingest", "add to the knowledge base", or runs "/ingest-link <url>".
Scan the repository for stale, broken, or missing documentation and repair the highest-priority issues. Use when auditing docs, checking AGENTS links, reconciling docs with code, or running periodic documentation maintenance.
Bootstrap a new business domain or bounded context with scaffolding, architecture updates, and structural tests. Use when adding a new domain, introducing a new business capability, creating a new module under src/domains, defining a bounded context, or establishing domain boundaries.
Capture reusable agent behavior and best practices as a skill update or a new skill after task completion. Use when a task reveals a repeatable workflow, exposes missing instructions, or surfaces a pattern worth preserving for future tasks. Examples: update an existing skill, create a skill for a new workflow, document guidance the agent should reuse, or refine repository skills after delivery. Review existing skills first, create new only when the scope is clearly distinct, and do not use this skill for one-off fixes with no reuse value. After the first draft, launch a subagent to refine the skill against meta/skill-guide.md.
| name | bug-fix |
| description | Reproduce and fix reported bugs with test-first verification and root-cause analysis. Use when debugging a defect, investigating unexpected behavior, triaging a regression, or implementing a minimal corrective fix. |
| metadata | {"author":"ai-landscape","version":"1.0.0","category":"workflow"} |
Use this skill when fixing a reported bug.
Reproduce before you fix. Do not guess at the cause or patch the symptom first.
Review these docs if you need context about the affected area:
docs/architecture/ARCHITECTURE.mddocs/quality/QUALITY-GRADES.mddocs/workflows/REVIEW-CHECKLIST.mdExtract from the report:
If any of these are missing, ask for clarification before proceeding.
Write a failing test first.
The test must:
[unit]_[bugScenario]_[expectedCorrectBehavior].If you cannot reproduce the bug with a test, investigate using logs, metrics, traces, or other observability tools if available. Do not implement a fix until the failure mode is understood.
Fix the root cause, not the symptom. If the real problem is missing boundary validation and the symptom is a null reference, fix the validation instead of adding a defensive null check in the wrong place.
refactor skill separately.Beyond the reproduction test, add:
docs/workflows/REVIEW-CHECKLIST.md.fix: [brief description of what was broken]Example 1: Missing validation at a boundary
Bug report: invalid input crashes a service method.
Action:
Example 2: Regression in existing behavior
Bug report: a previously supported workflow now returns the wrong result.
Action:
Question: I cannot reproduce the bug.
Stop and gather more context. Confirm environment, inputs, and timing, then use available observability data before changing code.
Question: Several fixes look plausible.
Use the failing test and execution trace to eliminate hypotheses. Do not pick a fix based on intuition alone.
Question: The reproduction test passes after my change, but other tests fail.
Treat that as evidence that the fix was incomplete or targeted the wrong layer. Re-check the root-cause analysis.