bug-investigation
Skill20 starsChanged 45 days agoMITView on GitHub
Investigate a bug/defect. Triggered by 'fix/investigate a bug/defect'
8 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- lklimek/claudiustheir own version, first seen Nov 5, 2026
- SoftBlack42/StarPietheir own version, first seen Oct 9, 2026
- camunda/camundatheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- dprakash2101/dotnet-production-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 23, 2026
- ldilov/harness-forgetheir own version, first seen May 19, 2026
- jasoncrawford/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Apr 25, 2026
Other versions8 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 8
- camunda/camunda★ 4.4ksame name
- SoftBlack42/StarPie★ 1.3ksame name
- ligenjian001-ai/agent-skills★ 8same name
- dprakash2101/dotnet-production-agent-skills★ 4same name
- ldilov/harness-forge★ 4same name
- hmj1026/bug-investigation★ 1same name
- jasoncrawford/claude-skills★ 1same name
- lklimek/claudius★ 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 repository26 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- breakdownSkill
- code-review-adversarialSkill
- code-review-multiSkill
- code-review-with-followupSkill
- document-changesSkill
- grillingSkill
- type-test-codeSkill
- explain-changesSkill
- github-actions-ciSkill
- github-appSkill
- github-ticketsSkill
- implementation-planSkill
- implement-simpleSkill
- implementSkill
- implement-ttcSkill
- orchestrationSkill
- pull-requestSkill
- review-and-wrap-upSkill
- verusSkill
- specSkill
- ticketsSkill
- update-working-copySkill
- verifySkill
- wrap-upSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
4
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
- Distinctive: line 6
If a bug is non-trivial, use /diagnosing-bugs to investigate it.
- Distinctive: line 13
If you are in the midst of implementation and the implementation changes caused the bug, fix it as part of the implementation.
- Distinctive: line 17
If there is already a defect ticket, save the root cause analysis on the ticket for the defect.
- Distinctive: line 18
If there is no ticket referenced for a fresh bug report, ask the user if you should create one using /to-tickets.
“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.
Files
If a bug is non-trivial, use /diagnosing-bugs to investigate it.
Generate a root cause analysis of the defect.
A fix can be implemented immediately without an issue/ticket if it has a simple straightforward root cause and fix.
Otherwise, integrate the fix into the current workflow. If you are in the midst of implementation and the implementation changes caused the bug, fix it as part of the implementation.
Issues/Tickets
If there is already a defect ticket, save the root cause analysis on the ticket for the defect. If there is no ticket referenced for a fresh bug report, ask the user if you should create one using /to-tickets. If you know how to search the issue tracker, first search it for a similar bug report. As a bonus suggest how to fix the defect based on your existing defect analysis if you are able, but don't explore the code base further to do that- focus on completing and reporting the root cause analysis.
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.