implement-fix
Skill3 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Implement bug fix based on RCA
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- insapption-projects/claude-agent-team-startertheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- insapption-projects/claude-agent-team-starter★ 1same 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 repository67 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- optimize-contextSkill
- a11y-checkSkill
- api-contractSkill
- backend-patternsSkill
- build-fixSkill
- checkpointSkill
- clickhouse-ioSkill
- code-review-eccSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- coding-standardsSkill
- config-auditSkill
- continuous-learning-v2Skill
- create-prdSkill
- deps-auditSkill
- e2eSkill
- eval-harnessSkill
- evalSkill
- evolveSkill
- executeSkill
- execution-reportSkill
- extract-sharedSkill
- firecrawlSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- frontend-patternsSkill
- golang-patternsSkill
- golang-testingSkill
- init-projectSkill
- instinct-exportSkill
- instinct-importSkill
- instinct-statusSkill
- iterative-retrievalSkill
- lazySkill
- learnSkill
- orchestrateSkill
- perf-profileSkill
- plan-eccSkill
- plan-featureSkill
- postgres-patternsSkill
- primeSkill
- project-guidelines-exampleSkill
- projectSkill
- prompt-auditSkill
- python-patternsSkill
- python-reviewSkill
- python-testingSkill
- rcaSkill
- refactor-cleanSkill
- releaseSkill
- security-reviewSkill
- seo-kitSkill
- set-working-dirSkill
- skill-createSkill
- strategic-compactSkill
- supadataSkill
- system-reviewSkill
- tddSkill
- tdd-workflowSkill
- test-coverageSkill
- testSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
17 rules. About 0 are common, 16 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈16
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
- Distinctive: line 61
Run the test to confirm it fails as expected:
- Distinctive: line 71
Follow the fix strategy from the RCA:
- Distinctive: line 75
Don't refactor unrelated code
- Distinctive: line 76
Follow existing code patterns
- Distinctive: line 77
Add comments explaining the fix if non-obvious
- Distinctive: line 84
Update related code if needed
- Distinctive: line 88
Run the specific test again:
- Distinctive: line 104
All tests should pass.
- Distinctive: line 108
Test the fix manually following original reproduction steps:
- Distinctive: line 117
No new issues introduced
- Distinctive: line 142
Update or create documentation:
- Very specific: line 185
Create implementation report: .claude/code-reviews/YYYY-MM-DD-bug-fix-[issue].md
- Distinctive: line 251
When ready to commit, use this format:
- Distinctive: line 289
Always write the test BEFORE fixing the bug
- Distinctive: line 292
Ensure full test suite passes (no regressions)
- Distinctive: line 293
Update RCA with implementation details
- Distinctive: line 294
Don't skip manual verification
≈ “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
Implement Fix: Bug Fix Implementation
Overview
Implement a bug fix based on the root cause analysis, following test-driven development principles.
Input
RCA file: $ARGUMENTS
Process
1. Read RCA Document
Thoroughly read the RCA to understand:
- Root cause
- Fix strategy
- Impact assessment
- Prevention measures
2. Write Failing Test (TDD)
Before fixing the bug, write a test that reproduces it:
# Create or update test file
# Run test to confirm it failsTest should:
- Reproduce the exact bug scenario
- Fail with the current code
- Pass once the fix is implemented
Example test structure:
def test_bug_issue_123():
"""Test for bug: [description]
GitHub Issue: #123
RCA: .claude/plans/rca-issue-123.md
"""
# Arrange: Set up conditions that trigger bug
[setup code]
# Act: Execute the buggy code path
result = [function_that_has_bug]()
# Assert: Verify expected behavior (currently fails)
assert result == expected_value3. Verify Test Fails
Run the test to confirm it fails as expected:
[test command for project]Output should show the test failing, confirming we've reproduced the bug.
4. Implement the Fix
Follow the fix strategy from the RCA:
Implementation guidelines:
- Make minimal changes to fix the specific issue
- Don't refactor unrelated code
- Follow existing code patterns
- Add comments explaining the fix if non-obvious
- Consider edge cases
Code changes:
- Update affected files
- Add necessary validation
- Improve error handling
- Update related code if needed
5. Verify Test Passes
Run the specific test again:
[test command]The previously failing test should now pass.
6. Run Full Test Suite
Ensure no regressions:
[full test suite command]All tests should pass.
7. Manual Verification
Test the fix manually following original reproduction steps:
- [Step 1 from reproduction]
- [Step 2]
- [Step 3]
Verify:
- Bug no longer occurs
- Expected behavior works
- No new issues introduced
8. Implement Prevention Measures
From the RCA, implement prevention steps:
- Add additional test cases for edge cases
- Update validation logic
- Add documentation
- Update error messages
- Add logging if appropriate
9. Code Review
Perform self-review:
- Fix addresses root cause (not just symptoms)
- Code follows project conventions
- Tests are comprehensive
- No over-engineering
- Comments explain "why" not "what"
- Error handling is appropriate
10. Document the Fix
Update or create documentation:
In code:
# Fix for GitHub Issue #123: [brief description]
# Root cause: [one-line explanation]
# See: .claude/plans/rca-issue-123.mdUpdate RCA document with implementation notes:
## Implementation
**Date Implemented:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Files Changed:**
- `[file]` - [what was changed]
**Test Added:**
- `[test file]` - [test description]
**Verification:**
- Test passes
- Full suite passes
- Manual verification successfulValidation Checklist
Before committing:
- Failing test created that reproduces bug
- Test failed before fix
- Fix implemented following RCA strategy
- Test now passes
- Full test suite passes (no regressions)
- Manual verification successful
- Prevention measures implemented
- Code reviewed
- Documentation updated
- RCA document updated with implementation notes
Output Format
Create implementation report: .claude/code-reviews/YYYY-MM-DD-bug-fix-[issue].md
# Bug Fix Implementation: [Bug Title]
**Issue:** #[number]
**RCA:** [path to RCA file]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
## Summary
[Brief description of what was fixed and how]
## Changes Made
### Files Modified
- `[file-path]` - [description of changes]
- `[file-path]` - [description of changes]
### Tests Added
- `[test-file]` - [test description]
- Coverage added: [X] test cases
## Verification
### Test Results
**Before Fix:**
\`\`\`
[output showing failing test]
\`\`\`
**After Fix:**
\`\`\`
[output showing passing test]
\`\`\`
**Full Suite:**
\`\`\`
[output showing all tests pass]
\`\`\`
### Manual Testing
- [x] Followed original reproduction steps
- [x] Bug no longer occurs
- [x] Expected behavior confirmed
- [x] No new issues observed
## Prevention Measures
- [x] Test case added for bug scenario
- [x] Test case added for edge cases
- [ ] Documentation updated (if applicable)
- [ ] Validation logic strengthened (if applicable)
## Ready for Commit
All validation passed. Ready to commit with:
`/commit`Commit Message Template
When ready to commit, use this format:
fix(scope): [brief description of fix]
Fixes #[issue-number]
Root cause: [one-line explanation]
Solution: [one-line explanation]
RCA: .claude/plans/rca-[issue].mdOutput
After implementation, provide:
Bug fix implemented and verified
Issue: #[number]
Root Cause: [brief description]
Fix: [brief description]
Changes:
- Modified: X files
- Tests added: Y test cases
Verification:
Specific test passes
Full test suite passes (N tests)
Manual verification successful
Ready for commit.Notes
- Always write the test BEFORE fixing the bug
- The test should fail initially (confirming bug exists)
- Make minimal changes to fix the specific issue
- Ensure full test suite passes (no regressions)
- Update RCA with implementation details
- Don't skip manual verification
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.

