agentleFS
AdhamxonAdhamxon/claude-code-skills/.claude/skills/bug-hunt-swarm/SKILL.md

bug-hunt-swarm

Skill2 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Parallel read-only multi-agent root-cause investigation for bugs, regressions, crashes, flaky behavior, or unexplained failures. Use when the user asks to investigate a bug, find the root cause, trace a regression, understand why something broke, or wants a ranked diagnosis with the fastest proof path without making code edits.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

18 rules. About 0 are common, 17 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈17

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Start by collecting the smallest useful investigation packet:

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Prefer this source order:

    line 21
  3. Distinctive:

    If the bug report is underspecified, infer a minimal problem statement and say what is still unknown.

    line 28
  4. Distinctive:

    Before launching sub-agents, read the closest project instructions and relevant docs for the touched area, such as:

    line 30
  5. Distinctive:

    Write a short investigation brief for the swarm:

    line 38
  6. Distinctive:

    Use read-only evidence gathering where useful:

    line 46
  7. Distinctive:

    Do not edit files, inject new instrumentation, or implement fixes as part of this skill.

    line 52
  8. Very specific:

    do not let the sub-agent edit files, run apply_patch, stage changes, commit, or perform any other state-mutating action

    line 62
  9. Distinctive:

    ask for concise investigation output only

    line 63
  10. Distinctive:

    ask for: hypothesis, supporting evidence, missing evidence, smallest proof step, and confidence

    line 64
  11. Distinctive:

    Use these four investigation roles.

    line 68
  12. Distinctive:

    Look for likely regressors in nearby history or changed contracts.

    line 102
  13. Distinctive:

    prefer evidence over elegance

    line 140
  14. Distinctive:

    keep alternate theories only when they remain plausible

    line 142
  15. Distinctive:

    If the evidence is too weak for a real ranking, say so directly and present the leading open questions instead.

    line 152
  16. Distinctive:

    When the fix is not yet clear, recommend the next proving step instead of pretending the diagnosis is complete.

    line 164
  17. Distinctive:

    When helpful, group actions into:

    line 166
  18. Distinctive:

    Do not implement fixes as part of this skill.

    line 172

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Bug Hunt Swarm

Investigate a bug with four read-only sub-agents in parallel, then have the main agent rank the likely causes and recommend the fastest path to prove or fix the issue. This skill is diagnosis-first: do not edit files or implement fixes as part of this workflow.

Step 1: Build the Bug Packet

Start by collecting the smallest useful investigation packet:

  1. Symptom
  2. Expected behavior
  3. Actual behavior
  4. Reproduction steps, if known
  5. Scope of impact
  6. Relevant evidence, such as logs, stack traces, failing tests, screenshots, recent diffs, or environment details

Prefer this source order:

  1. Direct user description
  2. Explicit files, stack traces, logs, tests, or screenshots provided by the user
  3. Current git changes or recent repo history when the bug appears regression-like
  4. The smallest relevant code path or subsystem surrounding the failure

If the bug report is underspecified, infer a minimal problem statement and say what is still unknown.

Before launching sub-agents, read the closest project instructions and relevant docs for the touched area, such as:

  • AGENTS.md
  • repo workflow docs
  • architecture, state, routing, schema, or runtime docs for the affected subsystem

Step 2: Bound the Investigation

Write a short investigation brief for the swarm:

  1. What appears broken
  2. What is not yet proven
  3. What part of the system is most likely involved
  4. What evidence already exists
  5. What kind of proof would count as confirmation

Use read-only evidence gathering where useful:

  • rg, git diff, git log, git show
  • reading logs, crash traces, and config
  • existing test runs or the smallest safe reproduction command

Do not edit files, inject new instrumentation, or implement fixes as part of this skill.

Step 3: Launch Four Read-Only Investigators in Parallel

Launch four sub-agents when the problem is large or ambiguous enough that parallel investigation helps. For a tiny and obvious issue, it is acceptable to investigate locally instead.

For every sub-agent:

  • give the same bug packet and investigation brief
  • state that the sub-agent is read-only
  • do not let the sub-agent edit files, run apply_patch, stage changes, commit, or perform any other state-mutating action
  • ask for concise investigation output only
  • ask for: hypothesis, supporting evidence, missing evidence, smallest proof step, and confidence
  • tell the sub-agent to avoid generic code quality feedback, nits, or speculative guesses without evidence
  • tell the sub-agent to send findings back to the main agent only

Use these four investigation roles.

Sub-Agent 1: Reproduction and Scope Investigation

Clarify the exact failure shape and its boundaries.

Check for:

  1. The narrowest reliable trigger
  2. Conditions that make the bug appear or disappear
  3. Expected versus actual behavior at the failure boundary
  4. Whether the impact is local, cross-cutting, deterministic, or flaky

This sub-agent is read-only. It must not edit files, apply patches, or make any other workspace changes.

Recommended sub-agent role: reviewer

Sub-Agent 2: Code Path and Failure Seam Investigation

Trace the most likely execution path and identify the seam where behavior diverges.

Check for:

  1. State transitions, lifecycle edges, or ordering problems
  2. Mismatched assumptions between caller and callee
  3. Data-flow or control-flow breaks
  4. The smallest code region most likely responsible for the failure

This sub-agent is read-only. It must not edit files, apply patches, or make any other workspace changes.

Recommended sub-agent role: explorer for broad tracing, or reviewer when a stronger local reasoning pass is more useful

Sub-Agent 3: Recent Change and Regression Investigation

Look for likely regressors in nearby history or changed contracts.

Check for:

  1. Recent diffs that correlate with the symptom
  2. Config, flag, dependency, schema, or migration drift
  3. Partial updates where several entry points should have changed together
  4. Behavior changes that fit the timing of the bug report

This sub-agent is read-only. It must not edit files, apply patches, or make any other workspace changes.

Recommended sub-agent role: reviewer

Sub-Agent 4: Proof Plan and Observability Investigation

Determine the fastest way to confirm or reject the leading hypotheses.

Check for:

  1. The smallest existing test or reproduction that should fail
  2. The most useful current logs, traces, metrics, or assertions
  3. A minimal non-mutating command that could raise confidence quickly
  4. What evidence is missing and how to collect it without broad churn

This sub-agent is read-only. It must not edit files, apply patches, or make any other workspace changes.

Recommended sub-agent role: reviewer

Report only hypotheses that materially improve the odds of finding the real cause. It is better to return two evidence-backed theories than six vague guesses.

Step 4: Synthesize Ranked Hypotheses

The main agent owns synthesis. Treat sub-agent output as raw investigation input, not final output.

Merge and rank the hypotheses:

  • combine duplicates
  • discard weak speculation
  • prefer evidence over elegance
  • separate likely root causes from mere contributing factors
  • keep alternate theories only when they remain plausible

Normalize the surviving hypotheses into this shape:

  1. Hypothesis
  2. Supporting evidence
  3. Missing or conflicting evidence
  4. Smallest proof step
  5. Confidence: high, medium, or low

If the evidence is too weak for a real ranking, say so directly and present the leading open questions instead.

Step 5: Output a Clear Diagnosis Path

Present the result in this order:

  1. Most likely root cause
  2. Plausible alternate causes, if any
  3. Fastest proof step
  4. Recommended fix path
  5. Open questions or blockers

When the fix is not yet clear, recommend the next proving step instead of pretending the diagnosis is complete.

When helpful, group actions into:

  • prove now
  • fix next
  • follow up later

Do not implement fixes as part of this skill. The output is a read-only diagnosis with a prioritized path forward.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

Reviews can't be read right now.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.