원클릭으로 Manus에서 모든 스킬 실행

bugmagnet

스타23

포크7

업데이트2026년 4월 18일 21:01

Discover edge cases and test coverage gaps through systematic analysis. Use when analysing TEST coverage, hunting for edge cases, or when code-reviewer identifies test gaps. Triggers on "find holes in my tests", "what could go wrong", "is this well tested", "what edge cases am I missing". When to pick bugmagnet vs alternatives: - find-bugs → branch-diff bug scan (uses git diff, scoped to recent changes) - security-review → OWASP-categorised vulnerability audit - code-review → PR-style review with comment threads - ct:bugmagnet → test-gap edge-case discovery (THIS one) If the question is "are my TESTS missing cases?", use bugmagnet. Otherwise pick one of the three above.

설치

Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.

Manus에서 실행

출처

pvillega

pvillega/claude-templates

GitHub 저장소 열기 Creator 저장소 보기

다운로드

Manus에서 실행

BugMagnet

Systematic test coverage analysis and bug discovery.

Based on gojko/bugmagnet-ai-assistant.

Workflow

🔍 ANALYSE  → Understand code and existing tests
📊 GAP      → Identify missing coverage
✍️ WRITE    → Implement tests iteratively
🔬 ADVANCED → Deep edge case exploration (optional)
📋 SUMMARY  → Document findings and bugs

Interactive mode (default): STOP and wait for user confirmation between phases. Autonomous mode: When invoked by another agent (e.g. code-reviewer), skip all STOP points and proceed through all phases automatically. Present the full summary at the end instead of pausing for input.

Phase 1: Analysis (🔍 ANALYSE)

Detect language and testing conventions
Read implementation — public API, parameters, state, dependencies
Locate test file — if none exists, ask user about creating one
Run baseline coverage if tools available
Read existing tests — understand current coverage and patterns
Ask user: "Are there additional files I should review?"

STOP — Wait for user input. (Skip in autonomous mode.)

Phase 2: Gap Analysis (📊 GAP)

Evaluate missing coverage using edge-cases.md:

Boundary conditions, error paths, state transitions
Complex interactions, domain-specific edge cases
Violated domain constraints

Categorise: High (core, errors, boundaries) → Medium (interactions, state) → Low (rare, performance). Present analysis with specific examples.

STOP — Ask user which tests to implement. (Skip in autonomous mode — implement all high-priority tests.)

Phase 3: Test Implementation (✍️ WRITE)

For each test, highest priority first: write single test (or 2-3 related), name describes outcome ("returns X when Y"), run immediately. Maximum 3 attempts per test — document and move on.

→ While writing tests, actual bug discovered in implementation → STOP. Do NOT fix the bug.

Create minimal reproduction test.
Explore 2-3 adjacent code areas (bugs cluster).
Document in skipped test: brief description, root cause, code location, expected vs actual, proposed fix. → Return to test writing.

STOP — Ask user if they want advanced coverage. (Skip in autonomous mode — proceed to advanced if high-priority gaps remain.)

Phase 4: Advanced Coverage (🔬 ADVANCED)

Create separate test suite: "bugmagnet session <date>"

Work through edge-cases.md comprehensively — complex interactions, error handling, numeric/date/string/collection edge cases, state transitions, domain-specific cases.

Phase 5: Summary (📋 SUMMARY)

Keep summary under 30 lines. No preamble.

## Test Coverage Summary

**Tests Added:** X total (Y passing, Z skipped/bugs)

**Bugs Discovered:**
1. Bug name — file:line — root cause — proposed fix

Reference Files

Edge Case Checklist

이 저장소의 다른 Skills

같은 저장소

fine-tuning-llms

pvillega/claude-templates

Deep LLM fine-tuning operational intuition — LoRA/QLoRA merge pitfalls, preference optimization (DPO/ORPO/SimPO/GRPO), chat-template footguns, completion-only loss masking, sequence packing, eval contamination, toolchain (TRL/axolotl/unsloth/torchtune). Load when post-training open-weights models, picking preference-optimization methods, configuring LoRA/QLoRA, suspecting eval contamination, or choosing a toolchain. Skip for inference/serving (use `llm-inference-serving`), prompt engineering, RAG, or pretraining. Triggers on: "QLoRA", "merge_and_unload", "DPO", "ORPO", "SimPO", "GRPO", "GRPOTrainer", "axolotl", "unsloth", "torchtune", "nf4", "apply_chat_template", "DataCollatorForCompletionOnlyLM", "cu_seqlens", "MMLU contamination", "catastrophic forgetting".

2026-05-0723

hetzner

pvillega/claude-templates

Deep Hetzner operational intuition — Cloud vs Robot vs Storage Box split, server-type taxonomy, region availability, IPv4 cost model, snapshot vs backup vs image, firewall default-deny, hcloud CLI, Floating-IP aliasing, cloud-init, Terraform provider drift. Load when sizing Hetzner resources, migrating to/from Hetzner, automating with hcloud/Terraform, or diagnosing Hetzner-specific gotchas. Skip for generic IaaS, Linux admin, or non-Hetzner clouds. Triggers on: "hcloud cli", "hcloud_server", "cax11", "cpx21", "fsn1", "hetzner robot", "primary ip cost", "without-ipv4", "vswitch", "floating ip hetzner", "storage box".

2026-05-0723

llm-inference-serving

pvillega/claude-templates

Deep LLM-inference-serving operational intuition — vLLM, SGLang RadixAttention, TensorRT-LLM tradeoffs; PagedAttention and KV-cache math, chunked prefill, prefix caching, disaggregated serving (DistServe, Mooncake), speculative decoding, quantization, MoE parallelism, TTFT/TPOT. Load when tuning serving-engine knobs, KV-cache sizing, batching design, quantization-format selection, speculative-decoding choice, or MoE layout. Skip for fine-tuning, embeddings serving, or hosted-API integration. Triggers on: "vLLM", "SGLang", "TensorRT-LLM", "PagedAttention", "RadixAttention", "chunked prefill", "prefix caching", "kv-cache-dtype", "EAGLE-3", "Medusa", "MLA", "AWQ", "NVFP4", "DistServe", "Mooncake", "EPLB", "TTFT", "TPOT", "goodput".

2026-05-0723

rag-ops

pvillega/claude-templates

Deep RAG application-layer operational intuition — chunking (late chunking, contextual retrieval), embedding-model landscape, reranker economics (ColBERT, ColPali), hybrid retrieval (BM25 + dense + RRF, SPLADE-v3), evaluation (RAGAS, judge bias), grounding, long-context-vs-RAG. Load when designing chunking, embedding-model selection, reranker integration, eval design, hallucination audits, or long-context-vs-RAG sizing. Skip for ANN index choice (use `vector-search`), embedding fine-tuning, or prompt engineering. Pairs with `vector-search`. Triggers on: "late chunking", "contextual retrieval", "MTEB", "BGE-M3", "Matryoshka embeddings", "SPLADE-v3", "RRF", "ColBERTv2", "ColPali", "HyDE", "RAGAS", "groundedness", "lost in the middle", "Self-RAG", "CRAG".

2026-05-0723

argocd

pvillega/claude-templates

Deep ArgoCD operational intuition — sync waves and hook lifecycle, ApplicationSet generators, Sync vs Health, drift root causes, sync options, AppProject constraints, rollback, multi-cluster. Load for sync ordering, hook design, drift diagnosis, generator selection, rollback planning, or multi-cluster registration. Skip for "what is GitOps", install walkthroughs, or basic Application YAML. Triggers on: "sync wave", "presync hook", "syncfail", "applicationset generator", "matrix generator", "hpa replicas drift", "ignoreDifferences", "ServerSideApply", "Replace=true", "self-heal", "app-of-apps cascade".

2026-05-0723

bash-hardening

pvillega/claude-templates

Deep bash correctness — `set -euo pipefail` traps, IFS/word-splitting, trap inheritance, process substitution, array gotchas, version-gated features, ShellCheck "looks right but isn't" patterns. Load when writing or hardening non-trivial bash scripts (installers, CI, unattended ops). Skip for basic if/while/for, one-shot interactive commands, or zsh/fish/POSIX-sh work. Triggers on: "set -e not triggering", "pipefail", "trap ERR", "PIPESTATUS", "macOS bash 3.2", "shellcheck SC2086", "harden bash script", "robust bash".

2026-05-0723

name	bugmagnet
description	Discover edge cases and test coverage gaps through systematic analysis. Use when analysing TEST coverage, hunting for edge cases, or when code-reviewer identifies test gaps. Triggers on "find holes in my tests", "what could go wrong", "is this well tested", "what edge cases am I missing". When to pick bugmagnet vs alternatives: - find-bugs → branch-diff bug scan (uses git diff, scoped to recent changes) - security-review → OWASP-categorised vulnerability audit - code-review → PR-style review with comment threads - ct:bugmagnet → test-gap edge-case discovery (THIS one) If the question is "are my TESTS missing cases?", use bugmagnet. Otherwise pick one of the three above.
credit	Adapted from channingwalton/dotfiles (https://github.com/channingwalton/dotfiles)

BugMagnet

Systematic test coverage analysis and bug discovery.

Based on gojko/bugmagnet-ai-assistant.

Workflow

🔍 ANALYSE  → Understand code and existing tests
📊 GAP      → Identify missing coverage
✍️ WRITE    → Implement tests iteratively
🔬 ADVANCED → Deep edge case exploration (optional)
📋 SUMMARY  → Document findings and bugs

Phase 1: Analysis (🔍 ANALYSE)

Detect language and testing conventions
Read implementation — public API, parameters, state, dependencies
Locate test file — if none exists, ask user about creating one
Run baseline coverage if tools available
Read existing tests — understand current coverage and patterns
Ask user: "Are there additional files I should review?"

STOP — Wait for user input. (Skip in autonomous mode.)

Phase 2: Gap Analysis (📊 GAP)

Evaluate missing coverage using edge-cases.md:

Boundary conditions, error paths, state transitions
Complex interactions, domain-specific edge cases
Violated domain constraints

Categorise: High (core, errors, boundaries) → Medium (interactions, state) → Low (rare, performance). Present analysis with specific examples.

STOP — Ask user which tests to implement. (Skip in autonomous mode — implement all high-priority tests.)

Phase 3: Test Implementation (✍️ WRITE)

For each test, highest priority first: write single test (or 2-3 related), name describes outcome ("returns X when Y"), run immediately. Maximum 3 attempts per test — document and move on.

→ While writing tests, actual bug discovered in implementation → STOP. Do NOT fix the bug.

Create minimal reproduction test.
Explore 2-3 adjacent code areas (bugs cluster).
Document in skipped test: brief description, root cause, code location, expected vs actual, proposed fix. → Return to test writing.

STOP — Ask user if they want advanced coverage. (Skip in autonomous mode — proceed to advanced if high-priority gaps remain.)

Phase 4: Advanced Coverage (🔬 ADVANCED)

Create separate test suite: "bugmagnet session <date>"

Work through edge-cases.md comprehensively — complex interactions, error handling, numeric/date/string/collection edge cases, state transitions, domain-specific cases.

Phase 5: Summary (📋 SUMMARY)

Keep summary under 30 lines. No preamble.

## Test Coverage Summary

**Tests Added:** X total (Y passing, Z skipped/bugs)

**Bugs Discovered:**
1. Bug name — file:line — root cause — proposed fix

Reference Files

Edge Case Checklist