bug-fix-protocol
Skill169 starsChanged 56 days agoMITView on GitHub
8-step disciplined bug-fix protocol that treats every production bug as two failures — the code defect itself and the testing system that allowed it through. Use when fixing a production bug, investigating a regression, writing a post-mortem, or auditing a missed defect. Triggers on "fix this bug", "production bug", "regression test", "post-mortem", "test gap", "why did the tests miss this".
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- nimadorostkar/Claude-Skills-collectiontheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- nimadorostkar/Claude-Skills-collection★ 33same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository23 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agentic-readinessSkill
- clipboardSkill
- code-that-fits-in-your-headSkill
- fetch-url-as-markdownSkill
- fpf-problem-solvingSkill
- hooks-managementSkill
- installing-cli-toolsSkill
- investigating-repository-historySkill
- maintaining-macos-healthSkill
- maintaining-windows-healthSkill
- mcp-managementSkill
- plan-modeSkill
- plugins-managementSkill
- prompt-engineeringSkill
- refactoring-csharpSkill
- repo-activity-summarySkill
- semantic-scholar-deepSkill
- settings-managementSkill
- skills-managementSkill
- ubiquitous-languageSkill
- windows-qa-engineerSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
Use this protocol whenever a defect reaches production, staging, or a customer environment.
- Distinctive: line 24
Document the fix: Commit message and PR description name the symptom, the root cause, and the fix in one sentence each.
- Distinctive: line 29
When applying the protocol, return:
- Distinctive: line 35
If step 8 produces "we couldn't have caught this," investigate further — that answer is almost always wrong, and accepting it is how the …
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 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.
Files
Bug Fix Protocol
A bug fix is two fixes in one: fix the code, and fix the testing system that let the bug through. Skipping the second step means the same class of bug ships again.
The full protocol (philosophy, eight steps with examples, audit checklist, anti-patterns) lives in PROTOCOL.md. Read it before applying.
When to apply
Use this protocol whenever a defect reaches production, staging, or a customer environment. Do not use it for bugs caught locally during normal development — those are part of the writing process, not testing-system failures.
The eight steps (summary)
- Analyze and reproduce requirements. Understand exact actual vs expected behaviour; identify minimal repro path; ask the user before guessing on ambiguities.
- Write a failing test (red). Encode the bug as a test that fails for the right reason. No code change yet.
- Trace root cause. Walk the failing test back through the system. Stop at the smallest place that, if changed, makes the test pass.
- Apply the minimal fix. Smallest possible change. No drive-by refactors.
- Verify green locally. Failing test now passes; no other tests regressed.
- Run the full suite + lints + types. Catch indirect regressions.
- Document the fix. Commit message and PR description name the symptom, the root cause, and the fix in one sentence each.
- Audit the testing system (the most important step). Ask: which layer should have caught this, and why didn't it? Then change that layer so it would catch the next instance — new test type, new fixture, new lint rule, new property test, new contract assertion. A fix without step 8 is incomplete.
Output expectations
When applying the protocol, return:
- The repro test (red, then green).
- The minimal code fix.
- A one-paragraph step-8 audit naming the missed coverage layer and the change made to close the gap.
If step 8 produces "we couldn't have caught this," investigate further — that answer is almost always wrong, and accepting it is how the testing system stagnates.
Reference
Full text: PROTOCOL.md.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
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.