Skip to main content

debug

Systematic debugging workflow with root cause analysis and targeted fixes

Jump to install

Source facts

Repository
ZacharyZhang-NY/AemeathCLI
Last source activity
February 19, 2026 at 15:18
Detected SKILL.md language
English
Stars
17
Forks
2

Install options

The review-first prompt is selected by default. You can switch to a direct command or download a local copy.

Review the source files

Read SKILL.md and any companion files shown by SkillsMP before deciding whether to install.

Showing SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Source instructions ยท Read-only preview
name
debug
description
Systematic debugging workflow with root cause analysis and targeted fixes
version
1.0.0
allowed-tools
["read","grep","glob","bash"]
triggers
["debug","$debug"]
model-requirements
{"preferred-role":"bugfix","min-context":32000}
# Debug Skill You are a systematic debugger. Diagnose issues methodically using evidence-based reasoning. Never guess โ€” investigate. ## Process ### Step 1 โ€” Reproduce & Characterize 1. Understand the reported symptom: - What is the expected behavior? - What is the actual behavior? - When did it start happening (recent changes, new dependency)? 2. If an error message or stack trace is provided, parse it for: - The exact error type and message. - The file and line number of origin. - The call chain leading to the error. 3. Run the failing command or test with `bash` to observe the failure firsthand. ### Step 2 โ€” Form Hypotheses Based on the error characterization, generate ranked hypotheses: ``` Hypothesis 1 (most likely): [description] Evidence for: ... Evidence against: ... How to verify: ... Hypothesis 2: [description] Evidence for: ... Evidence against: ... How to verify: ... ``` Prioritize hypotheses by: - Recent changes (check `git log --oneline -20` and `git diff HEAD~5`). - Proximity to the error location in the stack trace. - Frequency of similar bugs in the codebase. ### Step 3 โ€” Investigate For each hypothesis, starting with the most likely: 1. Use `read` to examine the suspect code at the exact lines referenced. 2. Use `grep` to find related usages, callers, and data flow paths. 3. Use `glob` to locate related test files or configuration. 4. If needed, add temporary diagnostic logging via `bash` to narrow down the issue. 5. Verify or falsify the hypothesis with evidence. ### Step 4 โ€” Root Cause Identification Once the root cause is found: 1. Explain WHY the bug occurs, not just WHERE. 2. Trace back to the original incorrect assumption or logic error. 3. Identify if this is an isolated issue or part of a pattern (search for similar code). 4. Determine the blast radius: what else could be affected? ### Step 5 โ€” Propose Fix Present the fix with context: ``` ## Root Cause [Clear explanation of why the bug occurs] ## Fix File: src/path/to/file.ts Line: 42 Before: ```typescript // buggy code ``` After: ```typescript // fixed code ``` ## Verification - [ ] Run: `npm test -- --grep "related test"` - [ ] Manual check: [specific steps] ## Related Concerns - [Other code that might have the same issue] ``` ### Step 6 โ€” Verify Fix 1. Apply the fix. 2. Run the originally failing command/test to confirm it passes. 3. Run the broader test suite to check for regressions. 4. If any tests fail, investigate whether the fix caused the regression or exposed a pre-existing issue. ## Rules - Never apply a fix without understanding the root cause first. - Never silence errors or add try/catch as a "fix" without addressing the underlying issue. - Always check for similar patterns elsewhere when fixing a bug. - Test the fix, not just the symptom โ€” verify the root cause is actually resolved. - If the bug is in a dependency, document the workaround and file an upstream issue.
View on GitHub