perfetto-trace-analysis
Skill226 starsChanged 16 days agoMITView on GitHub
Analyzes Perfetto traces to find the root cause of latency, memory, or
In this repository6 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- android-cliSkill
- kamfwSkill
- magicnet-device-debuggingSkill
- perfetto-sqlSkill
- recipe-maintenanceSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
14 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈10
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 31
Use this scratchpad STRICTLY to log verified facts: timestamps, slice names, thread IDs (utid/tid), and thread states.
- Distinctive: line 32
DO NOT write preliminary hypotheses or premature conclusions in the scratchpad.
- Distinctive: line 33
Review Domain Hints: Read the Domain Hints in each file to get a high-level overview of what techniques are possible.
- Very specific: line 34
Review SQL Reference: Read the SQL reference in references/sql.md and follow its Execution Protocol for all SQL generation.
- Distinctive: line 35
Target Resolution: If the user's request is broad (e.g., "why is the app slow?") and doesn't specify a package name:
- Very specific: line 39
If multiple packages are returned, ask the user to choose one.
- Distinctive: line 43
Follow this iterative loop until you have isolated the definitive root cause(s):
- Very specific: line 54
Metrics First: Start with a high-level view using trace metrics before diving into custom SQL (e.g., ./trace_processor --run-metrics …
- Very specific: line 57
Overlapping Time: When filtering by time, you MUST check for events that overlap with the target time range (e.g., start1 < end2 AND start2 …
- Distinctive: line 61
Evidentiary Rigor: Do not draw conclusions without explicit data.
- Distinctive: line 62
Wall Time vs. CPU Time: Do not assume a long-running slice is actively computing.
- Distinctive: line 63
Follow Dependencies: If a thread is blocked/waiting, you MUST find what it is waiting *for* (Binder, Lock, I/O, etc.).
- Distinctive: line 69
Persist Through Dead Ends: If a hypothesis is disproven or a query returns empty, do not conclude.
- Distinctive: line 73
Only when you have followed the entire chain of dependencies to the root cause(s) AND confirmed through exhaustive search that no other …
≈ “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
Resources
- Domain Hints: Reference files for specific performance areas:
CPU,Graphics,I/O,IPC,Memory,Power. These files each contain multiple expert-vetted, powerful trace analysis techniques to steer and aid in the analysis. - Perfetto SQL Reference: Reference guidelines for translating intents into valid queries are located in the SQL reference. You must read this reference and follow its Execution Protocol for all SQL generation.
Setup Phase (Mandatory)
- Initialize Scratchpad (Chain of Evidence):
- Maintain your working memory in a local scratchpad file located in the exact same directory as the target trace file.
- Name the file using the trace's filename appended with
_analysis.md(e.g.,[trace_filename]_analysis.md). Before creating it, check if a file with that name already exists by listing the directory's contents---to avoid biasing your investigation, DO NOT read the file's contents to check for its existence. If it does, append an incrementing version number (e.g.,_v2.md,_v3.md) until you find an available filename. You MUST hardcode this exact filename in all subsequent tool calls. - Use this scratchpad STRICTLY to log verified facts: timestamps, slice names, thread IDs (utid/tid), and thread states.
- DO NOT write preliminary hypotheses or premature conclusions in the scratchpad. It is a strict Chain of Evidence.
- Review Domain Hints: Read the Domain Hints in each file to get a high-level overview of what techniques are possible. Make sure to use this baseline knowledge when researching and retrieving hints during the ongoing investigation.
- Review SQL Reference: Read the SQL reference in
references/sql.mdand follow its Execution Protocol for all SQL generation. Do not guess schemas. - Target Resolution: If the user's request is broad (e.g., "why is the app slow?") and doesn't specify a package name:
- Execute a query to identify the active application:
sql INCLUDE PERFETTO MODULE android.startup.startups; SELECT package FROM android_startups; - If multiple packages are returned, ask the user to choose one. Save the chosen
package_nameto your scratchpad.
- Execute a query to identify the active application:
Investigation Protocol
Follow this iterative loop until you have isolated the definitive root cause(s):
1. Formulate Hypothesis
- Prioritization: Form hypotheses using information from: user prompt > "Domain Hints" (
CPU,Graphics,I/O,IPC,Memory,Power) > general knowledge. Be sure to leverage these "Domain Hints" as they are expert-vetted analysis techniques. - Source Attribution: Explicitly mention the source of your hypothesis (e.g., "Based on hints_io.md...").
- Focus Constraint: Focus on the primary bottleneck. Avoid investigating deep into binder transactions unless the user explicitly asks for it or there is no other obvious bottleneck.
- State Reasoning: Briefly state your reasoning based on previous findings before generating a new query.
2. Plan and Collect Data
- Metrics First: Start with a high-level view using trace metrics before diving into custom SQL (e.g.,
./trace_processor --run-metrics android_startup). - Broad to Narrow: Begin with broad queries using minimal filters. Favor fuzzy matching (e.g.,
GLOB '*abc*') over exact matching. - Overlapping Time: When filtering by time, you MUST check for events that overlap with the target time range (e.g.,
start1 < end2 AND start2 < end1) to ensure you don't miss slices that span across the boundaries.
3. Analyze and Drill Down (Depth-First)
- Evidentiary Rigor: Do not draw conclusions without explicit data.
- Wall Time vs. CPU Time: Do not assume a long-running slice is actively computing. You MUST query the
thread_statetable for the exact timestamp window of suspicious slices to verify if the thread wasRunning,Runnable(waiting for CPU), orSleeping/Uninterruptible Sleep(blocked). - Follow Dependencies: If a thread is blocked/waiting, you MUST find what it is waiting for (Binder, Lock, I/O, etc.). Cross process boundaries if necessary. You cannot conclude an investigation on a waiting thread without identifying the blocker.
4. Exhaustive Investigation (Do Not Give Up Early)
- Multiple Bottlenecks: Complex performance issues rarely have a single cause. Do NOT stop your investigation after finding the first anomaly. Even if you find a major bottleneck (e.g., emulator graphics lag), you MUST continue searching for other independent system-wide issues (e.g., lock contention, I/O stalls). To find other bottlenecks, search through the content of the "Domain Hints" files (
CPU,Graphics,I/O,IPC,Memory,Power) to retrieve and leverage expert-vetted, powerful trace analysis techniques. Investigate each relevant hint with depth. - Global Verification: Periodically perform a system-wide query for the longest running slices (
ORDER BY slice.dur DESC) and most frequent D-states to ensure your local investigation hasn't missed a massive, unrelated system stall. - Persist Through Dead Ends: If a hypothesis is disproven or a query returns empty, do not conclude. Pivot your focus, broaden your search constraints (fuzzy matching, wider time windows), and continue the mission.
Final Report
Only when you have followed the entire chain of dependencies to the root cause(s) AND confirmed through exhaustive search that no other major bottlenecks exist: 1. Summarize your findings detailing the verified chain of evidence. 2. Conclude with: "This concludes the trace analysis. You can review the full chain of evidence in [scratchpad_filename]. Let me know if you would like me to drill down into any of these specific threads, or if you'd like help drafting a bug report."
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.

