click-path-audit
Skill272 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Trace every user-facing button/touchpoint through its full state change sequence to find bugs where functions individually work but cancel each other out, produce wrong final state, or leave the UI in an inconsistent state. Use when: systematic debugging found no bugs but users report broken buttons, or after any major refactor touching shared state stores.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. 9 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
9
Common
Most of the 9 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Common: line 50
Before auditing any touchpoint, build a side-effect map of every state store action:
- Common: line 165
Full app audit: Use when launching or after major refactor.
- Common: line 166
Single page audit: Use after building a new page or after a user reports a broken button.
- Common: line 167
Store-focused audit: Use after modifying a Zustand store — audit all consumers of the changed actions.
- Common: line 188
After systematic debugging finds "no bugs" but users report broken UI
- Common: line 189
After modifying any Zustand store action (check all callers)
- Common: line 190
After any refactor that touches shared state
- Common: line 191
Before release, on critical user flows
- Common: line 192
When a button "does nothing" — this is THE tool for that
- Very specific: line 204
Run AFTER /superpowers:systematic-debugging (which finds the other 54 bug types)
- Very specific: line 205
Run BEFORE /superpowers:verification-before-completion (which verifies fixes work)
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 9 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
/click-path-audit — Behavioural Flow Audit
Find bugs that static code reading misses: state interaction side effects, race conditions between sequential calls, and handlers that silently undo each other.
The Problem This Solves
Traditional debugging checks:
- Does the function exist? (missing wiring)
- Does it crash? (runtime errors)
- Does it return the right type? (data flow)
But it does NOT check:
- Does the final UI state match what the button label promises?
- Does function B silently undo what function A just did?
- Does shared state (Zustand/Redux/context) have side effects that cancel the intended action?
Real example: A "New Email" button called setComposeMode(true) then selectThread(null). Both worked individually. But selectThread had a side effect resetting composeMode: false. The button did nothing. 54 bugs were found by systematic debugging — this one was missed.
How It Works
For EVERY interactive touchpoint in the target area:
1. IDENTIFY the handler (onClick, onSubmit, onChange, etc.)
2. TRACE every function call in the handler, IN ORDER
3. For EACH function call:
a. What state does it READ?
b. What state does it WRITE?
c. Does it have SIDE EFFECTS on shared state?
d. Does it reset/clear any state as a side effect?
4. CHECK: Does any later call UNDO a state change from an earlier call?
5. CHECK: Is the FINAL state what the user expects from the button label?
6. CHECK: Are there race conditions (async calls that resolve in wrong order)?Execution Steps
Step 1: Map State Stores
Before auditing any touchpoint, build a side-effect map of every state store action:
For each Zustand store / React context in scope:
For each action/setter:
- What fields does it set?
- Does it RESET other fields as a side effect?
- Document: actionName → {sets: [...], resets: [...]}This is the critical reference. The "New Email" bug was invisible without knowing that selectThread resets composeMode.
Output format:
STORE: emailStore
setComposeMode(bool) → sets: {composeMode}
selectThread(thread|null) → sets: {selectedThread, selectedThreadId, messages, drafts, selectedDraft, summary} RESETS: {composeMode: false, composeData: null, redraftOpen: false}
setDraftGenerating(bool) → sets: {draftGenerating}
...
DANGEROUS RESETS (actions that clear state they don't own):
selectThread → resets composeMode (owned by setComposeMode)
reset → resets everythingStep 2: Audit Each Touchpoint
For each button/toggle/form submit in the target area:
TOUCHPOINT: [Button label] in [Component:line]
HANDLER: onClick → {
call 1: functionA() → sets {X: true}
call 2: functionB() → sets {Y: null} RESETS {X: false} ← CONFLICT
}
EXPECTED: User sees [description of what button label promises]
ACTUAL: X is false because functionB reset it
VERDICT: BUG — [description]Check each of these bug patterns:
Pattern 1: Sequential Undo
handler() {
setState_A(true) // sets X = true
setState_B(null) // side effect: resets X = false
}
// Result: X is false. First call was pointless.Pattern 2: Async Race
handler() {
fetchA().then(() => setState({ loading: false }))
fetchB().then(() => setState({ loading: true }))
}
// Result: final loading state depends on which resolves firstPattern 3: Stale Closure
const [count, setCount] = useState(0)
const handler = useCallback(() => {
setCount(count + 1) // captures stale count
setCount(count + 1) // same stale count — increments by 1, not 2
}, [count])Pattern 4: Missing State Transition
// Button says "Save" but handler only validates, never actually saves
// Button says "Delete" but handler sets a flag without calling the API
// Button says "Send" but the API endpoint is removed/brokenPattern 5: Conditional Dead Path
handler() {
if (someState) { // someState is ALWAYS false at this point
doTheActualThing() // never reached
}
}Pattern 6: useEffect Interference
// Button sets stateX = true
// A useEffect watches stateX and resets it to false
// User sees nothing happenStep 3: Report
For each bug found:
CLICK-PATH-NNN: [severity: CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
Touchpoint: [Button label] in [file:line]
Pattern: [Sequential Undo / Async Race / Stale Closure / Missing Transition / Dead Path / useEffect Interference]
Handler: [function name or inline]
Trace:
1. [call] → sets {field: value}
2. [call] → RESETS {field: value} ← CONFLICT
Expected: [what user expects]
Actual: [what actually happens]
Fix: [specific fix]Scope Control
This audit is expensive. Scope it appropriately:
- Full app audit: Use when launching or after major refactor. Launch parallel agents per page.
- Single page audit: Use after building a new page or after a user reports a broken button.
- Store-focused audit: Use after modifying a Zustand store — audit all consumers of the changed actions.
Recommended agent split for full app:
Agent 1: Map ALL state stores (Step 1) — this is shared context for all other agents
Agent 2: Dashboard (Tasks, Notes, Journal, Ideas)
Agent 3: Chat (DanteChatColumn, JustChatPage)
Agent 4: Emails (ThreadList, DraftArea, EmailsPage)
Agent 5: Projects (ProjectsPage, ProjectOverviewTab, NewProjectWizard)
Agent 6: CRM (all sub-tabs)
Agent 7: Profile, Settings, Vault, Notifications
Agent 8: Management Suite (all pages)Agent 1 MUST complete first. Its output is input for all other agents.
When to Use
- After systematic debugging finds "no bugs" but users report broken UI
- After modifying any Zustand store action (check all callers)
- After any refactor that touches shared state
- Before release, on critical user flows
- When a button "does nothing" — this is THE tool for that
When NOT to Use
- For API-level bugs (wrong response shape, missing endpoint) — use systematic-debugging
- For styling/layout issues — visual inspection
- For performance issues — profiling tools
Integration with Other Skills
- Run AFTER
/superpowers:systematic-debugging(which finds the other 54 bug types) - Run BEFORE
/superpowers:verification-before-completion(which verifies fixes work) - Feeds into
/superpowers:test-driven-development— every bug found here should get a test
Example: The Bug That Inspired This Skill
ThreadList.tsx "New Email" button:
onClick={() => {
useEmailStore.getState().setComposeMode(true) // ✓ sets composeMode = true
useEmailStore.getState().selectThread(null) // ✗ RESETS composeMode = false
}}Store definition:
selectThread: (thread) => set({
selectedThread: thread,
selectedThreadId: thread?.id ?? null,
messages: [],
drafts: [],
selectedDraft: null,
summary: null,
composeMode: false, // ← THIS silent reset killed the button
composeData: null,
redraftOpen: false,
})Systematic debugging missed it because:
- The button has an onClick handler (not dead)
- Both functions exist (no missing wiring)
- Neither function crashes (no runtime error)
- The data types are correct (no type mismatch)
Click-path audit catches it because:
- Step 1 maps
selectThreadresetscomposeMode - Step 2 traces the handler: call 1 sets true, call 2 resets false
- Verdict: Sequential Undo — final state contradicts button intent
Other versions14 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 4
- SamuelNDCE/claude-super-skill-library★ 1100% same
- TironFox/everything-claude-code★ 1100% same
- davidanthonyn/claude-skills★ 0100% same
- PeterYang888/claude-skills★ 0100% same
Edited · 7
- Fmarzochi/EGC★ 61100% same
- gongyijie85/dsh-ecc★ 8100% same
- hahuyhungdev/ai-coding-config★ 349% same
- AI-Degen-69/issue-to-pr-skills★ 0100% same
- Lucioway/way-stack★ 0100% same
- pankaj-mahaur/Agent-Daemon★ 099% same
- renepf/claude-skills★ 0100% same
Wrote their own version · 3
- manastalukdar/ai-devstudio★ 1same name
- kuker24/OpenCodeBestFriend★ 0same name
- nolotus/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.
Used alongsideProjects with it also use diagnosing-bugs.
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.
GoogleSkilldiagnosing-bugs
Diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Use when the user says "diagnose"/"debug this", or reports something broken/throwing/failing/slow.
Also in 3 projects that use this
In this repository178 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .codex/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- examples/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .cursor/rules/common-agents.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/common-coding-style.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/common-development-workflow.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/common-git-workflow.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/common-hooks.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/common-patterns.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/common-performance.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/common-security.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/common-testing.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/golang-coding-style.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/golang-hooks.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/golang-patterns.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/golang-security.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/golang-testing.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/kotlin-coding-style.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/kotlin-hooks.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/kotlin-patterns.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/kotlin-security.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/kotlin-testing.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/php-coding-style.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/php-hooks.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/php-patterns.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/php-security.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/php-testing.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/python-coding-style.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/python-hooks.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/python-patterns.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/python-security.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/python-testing.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/swift-coding-style.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/swift-hooks.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/swift-patterns.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/swift-security.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/swift-testing.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/typescript-coding-style.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/typescript-hooks.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/typescript-patterns.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/typescript-security.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/typescript-testing.mdCursor rule
- llms.txtllms.txt
- article-writingSkill
- bun-runtimeSkill
- content-engineSkill
- documentation-lookupSkill
- frontend-slidesSkill
- investor-materialsSkill
- investor-outreachSkill
- market-researchSkill
- mcp-server-patternsSkill
- nextjs-turbopackSkill
- agent-evalSkill
- agent-harness-constructionSkill
- agentic-engineeringSkill
- ai-first-engineeringSkill
- ai-regression-testingSkill
- android-clean-architectureSkill
- The first 60 shown.
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.

