systematic-debugging
Skill2 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Hypothesis-driven debugging loop. Forces explicit hypothesis formation before any fix attempt. Prevents guess-and-check debugging. Use when investigating or fixing an observed bug, failing test, runtime error, broken behavior, or performance regression.
190 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- DemonDamon/AgenticXtheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- chrysogonus/power-agentstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- willy92wins/DayZ-Modding-Knowledge-Packtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- roundpilot/superpowers-antigravitytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- REPOZY/superpowers-optimizedtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- lingyired/status-triotheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
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.
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-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
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-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
obraSkilldiagnosing-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
mjunaidcaSkillbuilding-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
mjunaidcaSkillbuilding-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
Other versions190 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 190
- obra/superpowers★ 314ksame name
- NousResearch/hermes-agent★ 262ksame name
- open-metadata/OpenMetadata★ 16ksame name
- jnMetaCode/superpowers-zh★ 8.4ksame name
- vudovn/ag-kit★ 8.2ksame name
- vudovn/antigravity-kit★ 8.2ksame name
- openai/plugins★ 7.8ksame name
- ChrisWiles/claude-code-showcase★ 6.1ksame name
- farm-fe/farm★ 5.6ksame name
- microsoft/FluidFramework★ 4.9ksame name
180 more not listed
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 repository32 other files it gives its agents.
- skills/coding/redis-agent-skills/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/coding/redis-agent-skills/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-browserSkill
- autopilotSkill
- book-studySkill
- brainstormingSkill
- browser-useSkill
- cavemanSkill
- androidSkill
- brand-guidelinesSkill
- canvas-designSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- supabase-postgres-best-practicesSkill
- theme-factorySkill
- vercel-react-best-practicesSkill
- web-design-guidelinesSkill
- context7-aware-codingSkill
- document-intakeSkill
- explore-codebaseSkill
- find-skillsSkill
- finishing-a-branchSkill
- ohc-coding-disciplineSkill
- pdfSkill
- ralphSkill
- requesting-code-reviewSkill
- retrospectiveSkill
- seo-auditSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- subagent-driven-developmentSkill
- test-driven-developmentSkill
- writing-plansSkill
- writing-skillsSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
17 rules. 0 are common, 16 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 177 edited versions we read keep these.
16
Distinctive
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 13
Never guess-and-check. Always hypothesize first, then design a test for the hypothesis.
- Distinctive: line 17
Create a fast, deterministic, agent-runnable pass/fail signal for the bug.
- Distinctive: line 18
Prefer, in order: failing test, curl/CLI script, browser script, replayed trace, throwaway harness, or stress loop for flakes.
- Distinctive: line 21
If you cannot build a loop, stop and report what artifact or environment access is missing.
- Distinctive: line 26
Run the loop and confirm it matches the user's bug.
- Distinctive: line 27
Document: exact inputs → expected output → actual output
- Distinctive: line 29
If the loop finds a different bug, fix the loop first
- Distinctive: line 33
Write 3 hypotheses, ordered by likelihood (most likely first):
- Very specific: line 51
Use targeted instrumentation only.
- Distinctive: line 61
If confirmed: root cause found → go to Step 6.
- Distinctive: line 62
If ruled out: move to H2. Repeat.
- Distinctive: line 63
If all 3 ruled out: write 3 new hypotheses based on what you learned.
- Distinctive: line 67
Write a regression test that captures the bug (RED)
- Distinctive: line 69
Run regression test (GREEN)
- Distinctive: line 71
Remove all tagged debug instrumentation
- Distinctive: line 72
Run full test suite — no regressions
- Distinctive: line 79
Always trace back to WHY, not just WHAT.
“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.
Files
Systematic Debugging
Never guess-and-check. Always hypothesize first, then design a test for the hypothesis.
Step 1: Build the Feedback Loop
Create a fast, deterministic, agent-runnable pass/fail signal for the bug. Prefer, in order: failing test, curl/CLI script, browser script, replayed trace, throwaway harness, or stress loop for flakes.
If you cannot build a loop, stop and report what artifact or environment access is missing. Do not patch from code reading alone.
Step 2: Reproduce
Run the loop and confirm it matches the user's bug.
- Document: exact inputs → expected output → actual output
- For flakes: raise the reproduction rate until the signal is useful
- If the loop finds a different bug, fix the loop first
Step 3: Hypothesize
Write 3 hypotheses, ordered by likelihood (most likely first):
H1: IF [condition] THEN [expected] BUT we see [actual]
Evidence for: [why this is likely]
Evidence against: [why this might be wrong]
H2: [same format]
H3: [same format]Step 4: Test Most Likely Hypothesis
Design a targeted test that confirms OR rules out H1. A good test is:
- Targeted: tests H1 specifically, not the whole system
- Binary: clearly confirms OR rules out
- Fast: no full rebuild needed
Use targeted instrumentation only. Tag temporary logs with a unique prefix like
[DEBUG-a4f2] so cleanup is mechanical.
Step 5: Record and Iterate
H1: [confirmed | ruled out]
Evidence: [what you observed]If confirmed: root cause found → go to Step 6. If ruled out: move to H2. Repeat. If all 3 ruled out: write 3 new hypotheses based on what you learned.
Step 6: Fix with Confidence
- Write a regression test that captures the bug (RED)
- Fix the root cause (not the symptom)
- Run regression test (GREEN)
- Re-run the original feedback loop
- Remove all tagged debug instrumentation
- Run full test suite — no regressions
Common Mistake: Fixing the Symptom
Symptom: API returns 500 Root cause: DB connection pool exhausted Wrong fix: retry API call → symptom addressed, root cause remains
Always trace back to WHY, not just WHAT.
See references/debug-hypotheses.md for hypothesis templates by error type. See references/feedback-loops.md for ways to construct a reliable debug loop.
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.

