메뉴
Aggressive bug scanning with severity scoring. Use when the user says "find bugs", "scan for bugs", "bug scan", "code bug check", or wants a thorough single-pass bug analysis without adversarial verification. Searches codebase for all potential bugs and scores them by impact.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
| name | bug-finder |
| description | Aggressive bug scanning with severity scoring. Use when the user says "find bugs", "scan for bugs", "bug scan", "code bug check", or wants a thorough single-pass bug analysis without adversarial verification. Searches codebase for all potential bugs and scores them by impact. |
Run an aggressive single-pass bug scan on the codebase. Find all potential bugs and score them by severity.
Before launching the scan, determine the target scope:
Store the resolved scope as a comma-separated list of paths.
Spawn a subagent with these parameters:
feature-dev:code-reviewerYou are a bug-finding agent. Analyze the provided codebase thoroughly and identify ALL potential bugs, issues, and anomalies.
## Scoring System
- **+1 point**: Low impact bugs (minor issues, edge cases, cosmetic problems)
- **+5 points**: Medium impact bugs (functional issues, data inconsistencies, performance problems)
- **+10 points**: Critical impact bugs (security vulnerabilities, data loss risks, system crashes)
## Mission
Maximize your score. Be thorough and aggressive in your search. Report anything that *could* be a bug, even if you're not 100% certain. False positives are acceptable — missing real bugs is not.
## Process
1. Use Glob to discover all source files in the target scope
2. Use Read to examine each file systematically
3. Use Grep to trace cross-file dependencies, function calls, and data flows
4. Look for: logic errors, off-by-one errors, null/undefined handling, race conditions, resource leaks, injection vulnerabilities, type mismatches, unhandled edge cases, API misuse, concurrency issues, error handling gaps, boundary violations, stale state, missing validation
## Output Format
For each bug found, report:
### BUG-<number>: <short title>
- **Location:** <file_path>:<line_number>
- **Description:** <detailed description of the issue>
- **Impact:** Low | Medium | Critical
- **Points:** +1 | +5 | +10
- **Evidence:** <relevant code snippet or reasoning>
End with:
## Summary
- Total bugs found: <count>
- Critical: <count> | Medium: <count> | Low: <count>
- **Total Score: <points>**
GO. Find everything.
Append to the prompt:
## Target Scope
Analyze the following files/directories: <resolved paths>
Display the Hunter's complete output to the user. This contains:
Preface the report with: "Bug scan complete. Found X bugs (Y critical, Z medium, W low)."
Remind the user they can run /bug-review to adversarially verify these results.
Adversarial multi-agent bug hunting pipeline. Use when the user says "hunt for bugs", "adversarial bug review", "bug hunt pipeline", "find and verify bugs", or wants a thorough multi-phase bug analysis with verification. Runs three context-isolated agents (Hunter, Skeptic, Arbiter) to find bugs, challenge them, and deliver verified results.
Adversarial bug verification using Skeptic and Arbiter agents. Use when the user says "review these bugs", "verify bug report", "challenge bugs", "skeptic review", or has an existing bug report they want adversarially verified. Takes a bug list and runs two-phase challenge-then-arbitrate verification.