agentleFS
RaditteAnggoroRaditteAnggoro/skill-for-lazy-developer/.agents/skills/systematic-debugging/SKILL.md

systematic-debugging

Skill1 starsChanged 7 days agoMITView on GitHub

Diagnose reproducible bugs, failing tests, build failures, or unexpected behaviour when the cause is unknown. Make a focused fix only when implementation is authorized.

190 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use chinese-code-review, chinese-commit-conventions and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-code-review

    中文代码审查规范——在保持专业严谨的同时,用符合国内团队文化的方式给出有效反馈

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-commit-conventions

    中文 Git 提交规范 — 适配国内团队的 commit message 规范和 changelog 自动化

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • obraSkill

    diagnosing-superpowers

    Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor results, a skill that didn't fire, "it took too long", "why is it so expensive", "what is it doing" — or wants to build a bug report for the superpowers maintainers, for the current session or a past one identified by id or path, on any harness.

    Also in 20 projects that use this

  • mjunaidcaSkill

    building-chatgpt-apps

    Guides creation of ChatGPT Apps with interactive widgets using OpenAI Apps SDK and MCP servers. Use when building ChatGPT custom apps with visual UI components, embedded widgets, or rich interactive experiences. Covers widget architecture, MCP server setup with FastMCP, response metadata, and Developer Mode configuration. NOT when building standard MCP servers without widgets (use building-mcp-servers skill instead).

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • mjunaidcaSkill

    building-chat-interfaces

    Build AI chat interfaces with custom backends, authentication, and context injection. Use when integrating chat UI with AI agents, adding auth to chat, injecting user/page context, or implementing httpOnly cookie proxies. Covers ChatKitServer, useChatKit, and MCP auth patterns. NOT when building simple chatbots without persistence or custom agent integration.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • +2 more from Leodorareluctant259
  • +5 more from mjunaidca

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 177 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 1

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    If reproduction is unavailable, inspect the supplied evidence, state the limitation, and investigate independently where possible.

    line 14

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 177 edited versions of this file we could read. “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

Systematic Debugging

Identify what causes the observed failure before selecting a fix. Scale the investigation to the problem: a clear error may need one focused check; intermittent behaviour may need instrumentation.

Establish the failure

Record expected and actual behaviour, a minimal triggering input or sequence, the environment, and the first relevant error. Reproduce using the project's existing tooling when available. Inspect the failing assertion and complete relevant stack trace.

If reproduction is unavailable, inspect the supplied evidence, state the limitation, and investigate independently where possible. Ask only for the missing information that prevents progress. Label any proposed fix as unverified until the original failure can be tested.

Locate the cause

Trace the faulty value or state through callers and boundaries. Compare a working path and inspect recent relevant changes. Distinguish application logic, configuration, dependency, and environmental failures.

For diagnosis-only work, use existing logs, read-only inspection, or isolated scratch experiments without editing repository source or configuration. When code changes are authorized, add narrow temporary instrumentation if a boundary is uncertain. Capture field names, types, timing, and redacted identifiers as needed; do not print credentials or complete sensitive payloads. Avoid permanent instrumentation unless it serves the requested fix.

Test a hypothesis

State a concrete explanation and the observation that would confirm or reject it. Use a small experiment that isolates the relevant variable. Read the result before changing the explanation. Preserve useful evidence and remove temporary changes that no longer serve the task.

When attempts keep failing, stop stacking patches. Revisit the reproduction and assumptions, seek another explanation, and report what each experiment ruled out. Do not declare an architectural flaw merely because several attempts failed. Escalate a decision only if the required change exceeds the user's requested scope.

Resolve within scope

A diagnosis-only request ends with the supported cause, evidence, and fix direction. A request to fix includes the necessary implementation and verification without another routine confirmation.

For a fix, reuse a test that captures the regression or add a focused case when coverage is missing. Implement at the responsible boundary and rerun the original reproduction plus affected neighbouring checks. Use synchronization or a controlled clock for timing failures rather than arbitrary sleeps.

Report cause, change if authorized, reproduction result, and any remaining uncertainty. Treat a failed reproduction due to missing dependencies as blocked evidence, not proof that the bug is fixed.

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.

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.