agentleFS
SpencerGossSpencerGoss/agent-engineering/debug-session/SKILL.md

debug-session

Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when something is broken and the cause isn't obvious. Trigger on: "it's not working", "tests are failing", "the build is broken", "nothing is running", "something weird is happening", "it worked before", "I don't know what changed", "rollback this", any error, crash, unexpected output, or regression. Also trigger when an agent made autonomous changes that need auditing or reversing. NOT for design reviews or refactoring — use code-review-session or refactor-session instead. Never assume cause — always diagnose before fixing.

  • Reads credentials
  • Deletes or force-pushes

6 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

36 rules. 0 are common, 31 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 31

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 5

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Before starting, route to the right approach:

    line 29
  2. Distinctive:

    If a debug session isolates the problem to a UI behavior (not a code crash), stop and switch to browser-level investigation.

    line 40
  3. Distinctive:

    Before investigating the specific bug, categorize it:

    line 46
  4. Distinctive:

    If data: validate inputs first, check the pipeline upstream

    line 55
  5. Distinctive:

    If logic: find the smallest reproducing case, binary-search for the breaking change

    line 56
  6. Distinctive:

    If state: add logging at every state transition, check for concurrent access

    line 57
  7. Distinctive:

    If environment: compare environments systematically (versions, configs, env vars)

    line 58
  8. Distinctive:

    If integration: test the external dependency in isolation first

    line 59
  9. Distinctive:

    Before asking the user anything, run these immediately:

    line 69
  10. Distinctive:

    If the user gives a vague "it's broken" — run git commands first, then ask only the questions you can't self-answer.

    line 86
  11. Distinctive:

    Don't debug what you can't reproduce.

    line 105
  12. Distinctive:

    Run the exact failing command / interaction

    line 107
  13. Distinctive:

    If intermittent → note the conditions that trigger it

    line 110
  14. Distinctive:

    If it can't be reproduced:

    line 112
  15. Distinctive:

    Check if it was a one-time environment issue

    line 113
  16. Distinctive:

    Check for race conditions or async timing issues

    line 114
  17. Distinctive:

    Before forming a hypothesis, collect raw evidence:

    line 154
  18. Very specific:

    Log raw API response shape: Don't assume the shape — log JSON.stringify(response) or print(response) and read the actual output

    line 156
  19. Very specific:

    Verify immutability: If state looks wrong in a UI framework, check for direct mutation (state.x = y instead of an immutable update)

    line 158
  20. Distinctive:

    Only after collecting this evidence, proceed to form a hypothesis.

    line 161
  21. Distinctive:

    Read the diff — what did it actually change vs what it said it changed?

    line 190
  22. Distinctive:

    If an agent may have caused the bug, read the project's "Off-Limits" / "Hard Rules" sections first — these contain constraints agents …

    line 193
  23. Distinctive:

    Only after Steps 3–5 are complete.

    line 199
  24. Distinctive:

    Don't refactor while fixing — add that to a TODO

    line 204
  25. Very specific:

    Add a comment if the fix is non-obvious: # Fixes: [what was wrong and why]

    line 205
  26. Distinctive:

    Test in paper/sandbox mode first, always

    line 208
  27. Distinctive:

    If fixing execution logic: write a unit test before applying the fix

    line 209
  28. Distinctive:

    Never go live to "test" a fix

    line 210
  29. Distinctive:

    Run the test suite: does anything new break?

    line 219
  30. Very specific:

    Commit with a clear message: fix: [what was broken and what fixed it]

    line 221
  31. Distinctive:

    After resolving, capture what happened so it doesn't repeat:

    line 229
  32. Distinctive:

    Add a test: if the bug is reproducible and no test would have caught it

    line 233
  33. Distinctive:

    Was the agent the cause?: Ask explicitly: "Did the agent produce the bug (wrong edit, wrong approach, wrong assumption)?" If yes, record …

    line 243
  34. Distinctive:

    If changes broke things and you want to revert:

    line 282
  35. Distinctive:

    Always confirm with the user before running git reset --hard — it discards changes permanently.

    line 301
  36. Very specific:

    If the bug is elusive after 2+ hypotheses, suggest a different model's perspective (e.g.

    line 307

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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

Hard Rules

  • High-stakes systems first: Any issue touching irreversible side effects (live order execution, payments, production data writes, anything in a live-money or production financial system) is CRITICAL regardless of apparent severity. Stop and assess before proceeding.
  • Never assume cause — always diagnose before fixing. State a hypothesis BEFORE changing any code.
  • Fix one thing at a time — never bundle multiple fixes or refactor while fixing.

Debug Session — Systematic Root-Cause Diagnosis

A disciplined diagnose-before-fix workflow. The goal is to find the root cause, not patch the first symptom, and to leave the codebase with a regression test plus a captured insight so the same bug can't recur.

Routing: Debug vs. Browser/UI Testing

Before starting, route to the right approach:

SituationUse
App won't start, build fails, crash on loadThis skill (debug-session)
Runtime error, logic bug, wrong dataThis skill (debug-session)
"UI isn't doing what I expect visually"Browser-automation testing (Playwright)
"Verify a specific UI interaction works"Browser-automation testing (Playwright)
"Take a screenshot of the app"Browser-automation testing (Playwright)
"Why isn't my button/form/component working?"Start here → if no code error found, hand off to browser-automation testing

If a debug session isolates the problem to a UI behavior (not a code crash), stop and switch to browser-level investigation.


Step 0: Step Back (before any diagnosis)

Before investigating the specific bug, categorize it:

  1. What category of failure is this?
    • Data issue (wrong input, corrupt data, missing values, type mismatch)
    • Logic error (wrong condition, off-by-one, incorrect algorithm)
    • State bug (race condition, stale cache, incorrect initialization)
    • Environment mismatch (works locally, fails in CI; dependency version; config difference)
    • Integration failure (API changed, schema drift, timeout, auth expired)
  2. What general debugging principle applies?
    • If data: validate inputs first, check the pipeline upstream
    • If logic: find the smallest reproducing case, binary-search for the breaking change
    • If state: add logging at every state transition, check for concurrent access
    • If environment: compare environments systematically (versions, configs, env vars)
    • If integration: test the external dependency in isolation first
  3. What's the most common cause for this category in this codebase? (Check any local record of past bugs/known failure modes if one exists.)

This narrows the search space BEFORE you read code. The category determines your strategy.


Step 1: Get the Situation

Before asking the user anything, run these immediately:

git diff                    # what changed in the working tree
git log --oneline -5        # recent commit history

Fallback: If git diff fails (git not found, not a repo, or permission error), skip it and ask: "What changed since it last worked? Any recent file edits, installs, or commands?"

Prior-insight retrieval: Before diagnosing, check whatever local notes exist (project notes, prior-decisions file, persistent insight log) for past learnings in this domain. Grep for keywords from the error (module names, error types, domain tags). If a past insight matches, state it: "Previously learned: [insight]. Checking if it applies here." This prevents re-discovering the same root cause.

Then collect only what you still can't answer from context:

  1. What broke? (error message, wrong behavior, crash — exact output if possible)
  2. When did it last work? (last commit, last action, "never worked")
  3. What changed? — answer from git diff / git log first; only ask if unclear
  4. Can you reproduce it? — run the failing command directly first; only ask if intermittent

If the user gives a vague "it's broken" — run git commands first, then ask only the questions you can't self-answer.


Step 2: Triage — How Bad Is It?

SeverityDefinitionAction
🔴 CriticalApp won't start / data at risk / irreversible side effects affectedStop everything, stabilize first
🟠 HighCore feature broken, tests failing, build failsFix before new work
🟡 MediumFeature degraded, visual bug, non-critical test failFix in current session
🟢 LowMinor cosmetic, edge case, nice-to-haveLog and schedule

High-stakes note: Any issue touching live execution / payments / production writes = 🔴 Critical regardless of apparent severity. Stop and assess before proceeding.


Step 3: Reproduce

Don't debug what you can't reproduce. Steps:

  1. Run the exact failing command / interaction
  2. Capture the full error output (not just the last line)
  3. Confirm it's reproducible (not a fluke)
  4. If intermittent → note the conditions that trigger it

If it can't be reproduced:

  • Check if it was a one-time environment issue
  • Check for race conditions or async timing issues
  • Try a clean restart (clear cache, restart dev server, fresh virtual environment)

Step 4: Isolate

Narrow down where the problem lives before touching code.

Frontend / web UI checklist:

  • Capture browser console output via a browser-automation tool (agents can't open browser devtools directly)
  • Network requests failing?
  • Which component throws? (error-boundary message)
  • Does it fail with mock data too, or only with live data?
  • Does a clean dependency install + dev-server restart fix it?
  • Any missing env vars?

Backend / service checklist:

  • Full traceback — read the bottom of the stack trace first
  • Which module raises? Is it your code or a library?
  • Does it fail in isolation (unit test) or only in the full pipeline?
  • Environment issue? (runtime version, virtual environment active, deps installed)
  • Any .env vars missing or misread?
  • If it's a financial/trading system: does it fail in paper/sandbox mode? (if so, don't test in live mode)

An agent made changes and broke something:

  • Run git diff to see exactly what changed
  • Run git log --oneline -10 to find the last known-good commit
  • Were there session notes describing what was being built?

Step 5: Diagnose

Root cause, not symptoms. Don't fix the first thing that looks wrong. Ask "Why did this happen?" at least twice. The first answer is usually a symptom. Infrastructure bugs especially tend to have a structural cause that recurs if you only patch the symptom. (Classic example: a series of "contamination" fixes that were all symptoms of one structural problem — a shared working directory.)

Step 5a: Gather Diagnostic Evidence

IMPORTANT: Log your hypothesis BEFORE running reproduce attempts. Without a hypothesis first, you're guessing — not debugging.

Before forming a hypothesis, collect raw evidence:

  • Add temporary logging: console.log('DEBUG:', variable) / print(f"DEBUG: {variable}") at the point of failure
  • Log raw API response shape: Don't assume the shape — log JSON.stringify(response) or print(response) and read the actual output
  • Check async/await coverage: Scan the call chain — every async function needs an await; a missing one returns a Promise/coroutine object instead of the value
  • Verify immutability: If state looks wrong in a UI framework, check for direct mutation (state.x = y instead of an immutable update)
  • Check if the bug exists in isolation: Comment out surrounding code — does the issue persist with minimal input?

Only after collecting this evidence, proceed to form a hypothesis.

Form a hypothesis before writing any fix. State it explicitly:

"I think the issue is [X] because [evidence Y]. If I'm right, fixing [Z] should resolve it."

Evidence that supports a hypothesis > instinct. Common root causes by type:

Import / dependency errors:

  • Missing package → install it
  • Version mismatch → check the dependency manifest (package.json / requirements.txt / lockfile)
  • Circular import → restructure the module

Config / env errors:

  • Missing .env var → add it
  • Wrong path → verify by printing/logging it
  • Wrong port / host → check the config file

Logic errors:

  • Off-by-one, wrong condition, inverted boolean
  • Async timing (promise not awaited, callback order)
  • State mutation (state directly mutated instead of via the framework's setter)

Data errors:

  • API response shape changed
  • Null/undefined where a value was expected
  • Type mismatch (string vs number)

Agent-introduced errors:

  • Read the diff — what did it actually change vs what it said it changed?
  • Did it touch a file it shouldn't have? (cross-reference project rules / off-limits paths)
  • Did it change shared utilities, breaking other things?
  • If an agent may have caused the bug, read the project's "Off-Limits" / "Hard Rules" sections first — these contain constraints agents sometimes miss.

Step 6: Fix

Only after Steps 3–5 are complete.

Fix rules:

  • Fix one thing at a time — don't bundle multiple fixes
  • Make the smallest change that addresses the root cause
  • Don't refactor while fixing — add that to a TODO
  • Add a comment if the fix is non-obvious: # Fixes: [what was wrong and why]

For high-stakes (trading/financial/production) fixes:

  • Test in paper/sandbox mode first, always
  • If fixing execution logic: write a unit test before applying the fix
  • Never go live to "test" a fix

Step 7: Verify

After the fix:

  1. Reproduce the original failure → confirm it no longer occurs
  2. Run the test suite: does anything new break?
  3. Spot-check adjacent behavior — did the fix have side effects?
  4. Commit with a clear message: fix: [what was broken and what fixed it]

Don't mark as resolved until verified.


Step 8: Capture

After resolving, capture what happened so it doesn't repeat:

  1. Add a project rule (in your agent-instructions file, e.g. CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md) if an agent was the cause or this is a common mistake to avoid
  2. Log it in your project changelog/journal: what broke, what caused it, how it was fixed
  3. Add a test if the bug is reproducible and no test would have caught it
  4. Update .claude/rules/ (or equivalent rules dir) if there's a pattern to prevent
  5. Persist the pattern to whatever cross-session memory you keep so future sessions don't repeat the diagnosis. Format: "[BUG PATTERN]: [cause] → [fix]" — e.g., "[API KeyError]: response shape changed in v2 → access data['result']['price'], not data['price']"
  6. Extract a compact insight to your persistent notes, tagged with the relevant domain. Before writing, scan existing entries for the same tag — consolidate rather than duplicate. Format:
    [DATE] [tag] INSIGHT: [root cause in one sentence]
    [DATE] [tag] WHY: [why it wasn't obvious / what made it tricky]
    Tag with the domain (e.g., [data], [ml], [api], [auth]) for future retrieval.

Was the agent the cause? Ask explicitly: "Did the agent produce the bug (wrong edit, wrong approach, wrong assumption)?" If yes, record the mistake pattern, check whether it's a repeat, and promote repeats into your hard-rules file so they can't recur.


Platform-Specific Checks (when on Windows)

  • Encoding: prefix Python scripts with PYTHONUTF8=1 (cp1252 vs UTF-8 mismatches)
  • Paths: use forward slashes or raw strings; never backslash in Python imports
  • Signal handlers: use try/except, not add_signal_handler (not supported on Windows)
  • Shell: verify which bash works; PowerShell behaves differently for shell scripts

Quick Reference: Common Errors

Frontend / web UI

ErrorLikely CauseQuick Fix
White screen / blank renderUI framework crash — check consoleCapture console output via browser automation
Cannot read properties of undefinedData not loaded before renderAdd loading state / null check
Styles missingUtility class not in configCheck class name, check the CSS/build config
API 404Wrong endpoint or dev server not runningConfirm the dev server is running
Stale UI after changeHot reload failedHard refresh (Ctrl+Shift+R)

Backend / service

ErrorLikely CauseQuick Fix
ModuleNotFoundErrorPackage not installedInstall it / activate the correct virtual environment
KeyError on API responseAPI response shape changedPrint the raw response and inspect
Logic not triggeringCondition / branch not metAdd debug logging where the condition is evaluated
Request rejected by an external serviceInput exceeds a limitCheck the relevant limit/config value
AttributeError on configMissing key or wrong defaultCheck the config module and class defaults

Bug appears in two repos at once: Likely a shared dependency. Debug each repo independently first; check shared tooling (runtime, package manager, git, virtual environment) last.


Rollback Procedure

If changes broke things and you want to revert:

# See what changed
git diff HEAD

# Unstage (keeps working-tree changes)
git reset HEAD

# Discard all working-tree changes
git reset --hard HEAD

# Revert a specific file only
git checkout HEAD -- path/to/file.py

# Go back to a specific commit
git log --oneline -10     # find the commit hash
git reset --hard <hash>   # go back to it

Always confirm with the user before running git reset --hard — it discards changes permanently.


Second Opinion

If the bug is elusive after 2+ hypotheses, suggest a different model's perspective (e.g. codex exec 'Find the bug in this diff'). If the bug involves an external API/library behaving unexpectedly, suggest verifying the documented behavior with a grounded search tool (e.g. gemini -p 'Does [API/function] actually work this way? Check the docs.').


Trigger Conditions

  • "It's not working", "tests are failing", "the build is broken", "nothing is running"
  • "Something weird is happening", "it worked before", "I don't know what changed"
  • "Rollback this" / any request to audit or reverse autonomous agent changes
  • Any error, crash, unexpected output, or regression where the cause isn't obvious

Out of Scope

  • An agent produced structurally wrong output (missed requirements, ignored instructions, added unwanted scope) → that's a reasoning bug, not a code bug; analyze the prompt/response instead
  • "You missed the point", "that's not what I asked" → reasoning analysis, not this skill
  • Design reviews → use code-review-session
  • Refactoring → use refactor-session
  • This skill is for CODE bugs (crashes, test failures, broken builds), not model-reasoning failures.

Common Traps

  • Chasing symptoms instead of root cause: A TypeError on line 50 may be caused by bad data on line 12. Trace the data flow backward from the error site before fixing at the crash point.
  • Tests pass but prod fails: Tests often use mocked data or a clean environment. Bugs that only appear with real data, stale cache, or platform-specific behavior (encoding, timezone) won't be caught by unit tests. Reproduce in the closest-to-prod environment available.
  • Fixing two things at once: Bundling a "quick cleanup" with a bug fix makes it impossible to tell which change resolved the issue — and if it regresses, you can't bisect cleanly.
  • Assuming the error message is the bug: Error messages describe what failed, not why. "Connection refused" might be a missing env var, not a network issue. Read the full stack trace and check preconditions before trusting the message.
  • Skipping diagnostic evidence (Step 5a): Jumping to a hypothesis without logging actual values leads to "I thought it was X" debugging loops. Always add temporary logging and read real output before forming a theory.

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.