code-trace
Skill2 starsChanged 6 days agoMITView on GitHub
Trace unfamiliar code, diagnose a reproducible failure, investigate history, or pick a code-navigation tool, following symbols, callers, data flow, or regressions. Not for implementing a fix, reviewing a diff, or plain-text search. Output: an evidence-backed trace or root cause.
4 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- RomeCore/LLMDesktopAssistanttheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- lablup/backend.aitheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- laststance/skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 21, 2026
- matthewschanzlin/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Jun 18, 2026
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 4
- lablup/backend.ai★ 679same name
- laststance/skills★ 1same name
- RomeCore/LLMDesktopAssistant★ 1same name
- matthewschanzlin/claude-skills★ 0same 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 repository39 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- change-verdictSkill
- code-simplifySkill
- create-prSkill
- deploy-listSkill
- doc-maintainSkill
- feature-verifySkill
- flow-driveSkill
- flow-guideSkill
- git-smart-commitSkill
- git-worktreeSkill
- harness-setupSkill
- issue-analyzeSkill
- js-static-checksSkill
- laravelSkill
- legacy-characterization-testsSkill
- library-authorSkill
- merge-prepSkill
- module-designSkill
- nextjsSkill
- openspec-artifact-guardSkill
- opsx-apply-resumeSkill
- phpSkill
- phpunitSkill
- precommitSkill
- project-auditSkill
- project-briefSkill
- proposal-analyzeSkill
- pr-summarySkill
- pythonSkill
- reactSkill
- release-creatorSkill
- repo-intakeSkill
- repo-verifySkill
- swiftSkill
- tdd-workflowSkill
- ui-ux-verifySkill
- vue-2-notesSkill
- yii1Skill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
5
Distinctive
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 19
Use the smallest mode that answers the question.
- Very specific: line 33
If --mode is omitted, infer one mode only when intent is unambiguous.
- Very specific: line 46
Follow the repository's CX priority: use cx overview, then cx definition, then cx references for symbol-level questions.
- Distinctive: line 59
Use the five-phase loop:
- Distinctive: line 63
Before broad theorizing, run the smallest symptom-specific reproduction or probe that is available and safe.
- Distinctive: line 79
Keep diagnosis read-only: do not reproduce a destructive action or write to a shared database by default.
- Very specific: line 99
Use the narrowest history query that answers the question: git blame for ownership, git log --follow for timeline, git log -S/-G for …
- Very specific: line 109
Read references/select-tool/decision-tree.md for the local decision table and tie-breakers.
- Distinctive: line 112
Use the named fallback only when the primary is unavailable or returns no useful result.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 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
Code Trace
Use the smallest mode that answers the question. The default stance is evidence-first and read-only: inspect the repository, trace the relevant boundary, and report what remains unknown. A diagnosis may recommend a repair or a regression test, but it does not implement the repair.
Modes
| Mode | Use when | Completion criterion |
explore | You need to understand an unfamiliar symbol, file, module, or flow. | Entry point, caller/callee path, evidence, assumptions, and gaps are recorded. |
diagnose | A failure, regression, performance problem, data inconsistency, or timing issue needs a confirmed cause. | One falsifiable root cause is supported by evidence, or the current blocker and next check are explicit. |
history | You need to know when, why, or by whom behavior changed. | Blame, timeline, original/problematic comparison, and actionable conclusion are reported. |
select-tool | You need one code-navigation tool and a fallback chosen. | One intent row, executable primary call, and concrete fallback or none are returned. |
If --mode is omitted, infer one mode only when intent is unambiguous. A
request to edit a symbol first requires the repository's impact-analysis rule
before any implementation lane touches it; this skill only reports the impact.
When NOT to Use
- Implement a confirmed change → use
flow-drive. - Review a proposed change → use
change-verdict. - Review an existing skill document or change → use
change-verdictin itsdocsorriskmode. Specialized skill governance scoring and stocktake are retired.
explore
- Identify the repository root, question, entry point, and target symbol.
- Follow the repository's CX priority: use
cx overview, thencx definition, thencx referencesfor symbol-level questions. Use the selected semantic fallback only when CX cannot answer. - Trace callers, callees, data/control transitions, and observable output until the relevant boundary is accounted for.
- For
--dual, dispatch an isolated read-only perspective with only the original question, repository path, and depth. Reconcile evidence after the primary trace; never seed the second perspective with a conclusion. - For
--explain --depth brief|normal|deep, keep the response within the requested depth. Loadreferences/explore/only for the selected branch.
diagnose
Use the five-phase loop:
Clarify → Gather evidence → Trace and confirm → Design the fix → Preserve knowledge
Before broad theorizing, run the smallest symptom-specific reproduction or
probe that is available and safe. Record the command or interaction, relevant
output, and the expected-versus-actual assertion. If reproduction is
unavailable, blocked, or flaky, state that; for flaky behavior, include the
observed attempts, successes, and known conditions. For performance symptoms,
record a baseline from a comparable workload when available. Reduce one input
at a time only while the check is bounded and preserves the signal. When
changed code, an injected fault, or an altered fixture is what forced that
check red, the red result counts as reproduction evidence only after the
forced-mutation check passes. Confirm a mutation that is already present.
Applying a mutation, or repairing a setup, belongs to the authorized isolated
workflow in references/diagnose/root-cause-tracing.md. See
references/diagnose/reproduction-evidence.md for these evidence details,
including the clean-copy git diff, and
references/diagnose/root-cause-tracing.md when following a call or data path.
Keep diagnosis read-only: do not reproduce a destructive action or write to a shared database by default. Use existing evidence and authorized read-only queries; route any side-effecting confirmation through an authorized isolated environment. Maintain ranked, falsifiable hypotheses with a discriminating check and evidence that could reject each one. Redact secrets from commands, logs, traces, and handoffs. Do not promote a plausible explanation to root cause without a confirming check.
Load the phase-specific material from references/diagnose/ only when that
phase requires it. Inspect a selected bundled script's operation and effects
before running it, keep output bounded, and preserve its actual exit status.
Bundled diagnose scripts are not pre-approved; an unlisted shell command uses
the host's normal permission flow.
Return the phase report in the response and name the single next handoff by
default. Write an investigation artifact only when explicitly authorized; this
skill does not create directories or files and does not implement the proposed
repair.
history
Use the narrowest history query that answers the question: git blame for
ownership, git log --follow for timeline, git log -S/-G for introduction,
and git show/git diff for original-versus-problematic comparison. Pin the
relevant commit range, distinguish author from committer where material, and
avoid changing refs, the index, or the worktree. Load
references/history/commands.md for command/report details and
references/history/wsl-traps.md only when the environment matches.
select-tool
- Read
references/select-tool/decision-tree.mdfor the local decision table and tie-breakers. - Map the request to exactly one intent row and select its primary tool.
- Use the named fallback only when the primary is unavailable or returns no useful result. Prefer CX when both CX and GitNexus are valid, except for GitNexus-only operations; leave GitNexus-specific semantics to its external package skill.
- For a planned edit, rename, or refactor, use the local reference's impact timing before touching an existing symbol.
Return:
Intent: <matched decision-tree row>
Primary: <exact command or MCP call>
Fallback: <exact command or MCP call, or none>Output
## Code trace: <mode>
- Target/question: <target>
- Mode/depth: <mode and depth>
- Entry point or fixed commit: <evidence anchor>
- Flow or timeline: <ordered path>
### Evidence
- <file:line, commit, command, or tool result>
### Findings and gaps
- <conclusion, hypothesis state, or unresolved link>
### Next action
- <one handoff, or none>For diagnose, include expected/actual behavior, reproduction status, the
clean-copy diff verdict when a forced mutation produced the red result, ranked
hypotheses, one confirmed cause or blocker, options/risks/verification intent,
and stop-loss state. The verdict words are defined in
references/diagnose/reproduction-evidence.md. For explore --dual, keep primary and independent
findings separate before the agreement/difference table.
References
references/explore/— search patterns, explanation depth, and independent perspective.references/diagnose/— reproduction evidence, phase templates, tracing, waiting, defense-in-depth, checklists, and scripts.references/history/— git command/report reference and environment traps.references/select-tool/decision-tree.md— edge cases and routing rationale.
Verification
- Exactly one mode and requested depth are stated.
- Definitions/references were inspected at symbol or commit granularity before broad search.
- Every material conclusion has evidence; hypotheses and gaps remain labeled.
- Dual perspectives, if used, were independent and separately reported.
- No implementation, fix, refactor, commit, or destructive cleanup was performed.
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.

