Skip to content
Back to skills

Debug

ASecurity

Find the root cause of a failure with evidence, then fix it. Use this when something is broken: a bug, a failing test, an unexpected result, or an error you need to track down.

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added May 26, 2026
code-qualitydebuggingsecurity

Security analysis

A100/100

Pro scans all 2 files and shows the line behind each finding

Scanned May 27, 2026

npx -y skills add SyloRei/claude-godmode --skill debug --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Debug?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Debug
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/sylorei-debug/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/sylorei-debug)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: debug
description: "Find the root cause of a failure with evidence, then fix it. Use this when something is broken: a bug, a failing test, an unexpected result, or an error you need to track down."
user-invocable: true
---

# Structured Debugging

Find and fix bugs systematically using evidence, never guessing. Implements the debugging protocol defined in CLAUDE.md.

---

## Auto Mode

Auto Mode suppresses confirmation prompts and proceed-pauses — not the one clarifying question that can matter here: **if the symptom isn't reproducible and the exact error/repro steps aren't given, ask for them** (debugging the wrong symptom wastes the whole effort). Once you can reproduce, proceed: fix immediately after the root cause is found, surface assumptions inline, and treat course-corrections as normal input. Don't loop on trivia.

---

## The Job

Follow the 4-step protocol strictly. Do NOT skip steps.

---

## Step 1: REPRODUCE

- Get the exact error message, stack trace, or unexpected behavior
- Find minimal reproduction steps
- Identify: when did it last work? What changed since?
- If the bug is intermittent, identify conditions that trigger it
- Establish baseline: what is the EXPECTED behavior?

**Output:** "The bug is [X]. Expected [Y]. Triggered by [Z]."

---

## Step 2: HYPOTHESIZE

- Form 2-3 hypotheses based on evidence (not intuition)
- Rank by likelihood
- For each, state what evidence would confirm or deny it

**If stuck gathering evidence:** use `@researcher` agent to search the codebase for related patterns, recent changes, or similar bugs.

**Output:**
```
H1 (most likely): [hypothesis] — confirm by [check]
H2: [hypothesis] — confirm by [check]
H3: [hypothesis] — confirm by [check]
```

---

## Step 3: ISOLATE

- Test hypotheses one at a time, most likely first
- Add targeted logging or read code at suspect locations
- Narrow to the exact line/condition causing the failure
- DO NOT fix multiple things at once

**Output:** "Root cause: [exact cause] at [file:line]"

---

## Step 4: FIX & VERIFY

- Apply the minimal targeted fix
- Write a regression test (fails without fix, passes with fix)
- Run ALL quality gates (as defined in CLAUDE.md):
  1. Typecheck passes
  2. Lint passes
  3. All tests pass
  4. No regressions
- Remove any debug logging added in Step 3

**Output:** "Fixed [root cause]. Added test [name]. All quality gates pass."

---

## Rules

- Never guess. Always gather evidence first.
- State your hypothesis BEFORE each investigation step.
- One hypothesis at a time. Don't shotgun-fix.
- If stuck after 3 attempts: step back, re-examine assumptions, use @researcher for context.
- Always write a regression test.

---

## Agent Routing

| Step | Agent | Purpose |
|------|-------|---------|
| HYPOTHESIZE | MUST spawn @researcher when >5 files may be involved | Search codebase for related patterns, recent changes, similar bugs in parallel |
| FIX | Always spawn @test-writer for low-coverage areas | Ensure regression test coverage around the fix, especially in undertested code |
| Post-fix | MUST spawn @security-auditor for security-sensitive fixes | Validate that fixes touching auth, input handling, or data access are safe |

**Rule:** Never explore the codebase inline when @researcher can do it in parallel.

---

## Feeding Back Into the Workflow

Once the root cause is found (end of Step 3), decide how the fix re-enters the workflow spine:

- **Fix now (default).** Apply the fix immediately, write the regression test, run quality gates, commit. Best for small, well-understood bugs.
- **Defer as a work unit.** When the fix is larger or should be planned alongside other work, append a new work unit to `.planning/missions/<mission_id>/ROADMAP.md` describing the bug and root cause, then pick it up later with `/brief N`. The brief captures the why + what, `/plan N` breaks it down, and `/build N` ships it.

In Auto Mode, fix now unless the bug clearly needs design work — then append a work unit and say so inline.

**Appended work-unit note (for `.planning/missions/<mission_id>/ROADMAP.md`):**

```
- Fix: [root cause summary] — bug found by /debug.
  Root cause: [cause] at [file:line]. Needs: regression test + minimal fix.
```

---

## Related

- **@researcher** — use for gathering context when stuck
- **@test-writer** — use for comprehensive test coverage after the fix
- **/refactor** — if the fix reveals structural issues, refactor separately

**Spine:** find the root cause, then either fix now (`/ship`) or append a work unit to `.planning/missions/<mission_id>/ROADMAP.md` and resume the spine at `/brief N`.

Files in this skill

  • SKILL.md4.5 KB
  • scripts/README.md1.1 KB

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.