aif-fix
Skill10 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Fix a specific bug or problem in the codebase. Supports two modes - immediate fix or plan-first. Without arguments executes existing FIX_PLAN.md. Always suggests test coverage and adds logging. Use when user says "fix bug", "debug this", "something is broken", or pastes an error message.
- Reads credentials
5 other projects use a version of this, 4 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ainative-build/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- letuhao/lore-weaveedited, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- unxed/f4edited, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- lee-to/ai-factoryedited, first seen Sep 22, 2026
- hightemp/go_computer_use_mcp_serveredited, first seen Mar 21, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use aif-archive and aif-qa-check.
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.
letuhaoSkillaif-archive
Archive completed plans and roadmap milestones. Moves finished plans to the archive directory and optionally trims closed milestones from ROADMAP.md. Use when user says \"archive plans\", \"clean up plans\", \"archive completed\", or \"trim roadmap\".
Also in 3 projects that use this
letuhaoSkillaif-qa-check
Executes QA test cases created by $aif-qa in human-guided or automated-agent mode. Use when you need to walk through QA one case at a time, record pass/fail results, or have an agent verify cases through browser, CLI, API, automated tests, or file/document checks.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 4
- lee-to/ai-factory★ 1.2k28% same
- unxed/f4★ 26155% same
- letuhao/lore-weave★ 3556% same
- hightemp/go_computer_use_mcp_server★ 275% same
Wrote their own version · 1
- ainative-build/skills★ 10same 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 repository59 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- site-docs/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- web/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- docs/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- web/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- aif-architectureSkill
- aif-best-practicesSkill
- aif-build-automationSkill
- aif-ciSkill
- aif-commitSkill
- aif-distillationSkill
- aif-dockerizeSkill
- aif-docsSkill
- aif-evolveSkill
- aif-exploreSkill
- aif-groundedSkill
- aif-implementSkill
- aif-improveSkill
- aif-loopSkill
- aif-planSkill
- aif-qaSkill
- aif-referenceSkill
- aif-reviewSkill
- aif-roadmapSkill
- aif-rules-checkSkill
- aif-rulesSkill
- aif-security-checklistSkill
- aif-skill-generatorSkill
- aifSkill
- aif-verifySkill
- generate-claudemdSkill
- aif-architectureSkill
- aif-best-practicesSkill
- aif-build-automationSkill
- aif-ciSkill
- aif-commitSkill
- aif-distillationSkill
- aif-dockerizeSkill
- aif-docsSkill
- aif-evolveSkill
- aif-exploreSkill
- aif-fixSkill
- aif-groundedSkill
- aif-implementSkill
- aif-improveSkill
- aif-loopSkill
- aif-planSkill
- aif-qaSkill
- aif-referenceSkill
- aif-reviewSkill
- aif-roadmapSkill
- aif-rules-checkSkill
- aif-rulesSkill
- aif-security-checklistSkill
- aif-skill-generatorSkill
- aifSkill
- aif-verifySkill
- generate-claudemdSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
55 rules. 6 are common, 29 are distinctive, and 20 are very specific to this project.
6
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
29
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
20
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 31
No interactive questions: Do not use AskUserQuestion.
- Very specific: line 42
CRITICAL: Always pass paused: true with every handoff_sync_status call except done.
- Very specific: line 44
When creating a new FIX_PLAN.md: if there is no existing annotation and no Handoff context, do not add the annotation.
- Very specific: line 48
FIRST: Read .ai-factory/config.yaml if it exists to resolve:
- Very specific: line 54
If config.yaml doesn't exist, use defaults:
- Common: line 70
Read the resolved fix plan file
- Very specific: line 72
If found AND HANDOFF_MODE is NOT 1 (manual session): extract the task ID.
- Very specific: line 73
If found AND HANDOFF_MODE is 1: the Handoff coordinator handles sync — do nothing.
- Common: line 74
If NOT found: no linked Handoff task — skip all MCP sync for the rest of this session.
- Distinctive: line 78
Follow each step of the plan sequentially
- Common: line 79
After the fix is fully applied and verified, delete the resolved fix plan file:
- Very specific: line 96
THEN: Read .ai-factory/DESCRIPTION.md (use path from config) if it exists to understand:
- Distinctive: line 111
Treat them as project-level overrides for this skill's general instructions
- Very specific: line 112
When a skill-context rule conflicts with a general rule written in this SKILL.md,
- Very specific: line 114
When there is no conflict, apply both: general rules from SKILL.md + project rules from skill-context
- Distinctive: line 115
Do NOT ignore skill-context rules even if they seem to contradict this skill's defaults — they exist because the project's experience …
- Distinctive: line 122
Enforcement: After generating any output artifact, verify it against all skill-context rules.
- Distinctive: line 123
If any rule is violated — fix the output before presenting it to the user.
- Very specific: line 127
If .ai-factory/skill-context/aif-fix/SKILL.md does not exist and the resolved patches dir exists:
- Very specific: line 128
Use Glob to find *.md files in <resolved patches dir>
- Common: line 130
Read those selected patch files only
- Common: line 132
If skill-context exists, do not read all patches by default.
- Very specific: line 170
Handoff sync (manual mode only): If a Handoff task ID is known (from HANDOFF_TASK_ID or an existing annotation) AND HANDOFF_MODE is NOT 1, …
- Common: line 176
After agents return, synthesize findings to:
- Very specific: line 239
Handoff sync (manual mode only): If a Handoff task ID is known AND HANDOFF_MODE is NOT 1, call handoff_push_plan with { taskId: <id>, …
- Very specific: line 245
Handoff sync (manual mode, "Fix now" path only): If a Handoff task ID is known AND HANDOFF_MODE is NOT 1, call handoff_sync_status with
- Distinctive: line 277
Fallback: If Task tool is unavailable, investigate directly:
- Distinctive: line 280
Read the code around the issue
- Distinctive: line 282
Check for similar patterns elsewhere
- Distinctive: line 311
If it doesn't work, logs help debug further
- Distinctive: line 316
Check the code compiles/runs
- Distinctive: line 317
Verify the logic is correct
- Distinctive: line 318
Ensure no regressions introduced
- Very specific: line 323
Call handoff_push_plan with { taskId: <id>, planContent: <fix summary or updated plan> }.
- Very specific: line 324
If HANDOFF_SKIP_REVIEW is 1: call handoff_sync_status with { taskId: <id>, newStatus: "done", sourceTimestamp: "<current UTC time in ISO …
- Distinctive: line 368
Create the test file in the appropriate test directory (follow project conventions)
- Distinctive: line 370
Run the test to verify it passes
- Very specific: line 380
Log prefix: Use [FIX] or [FIX:<issue-id>] for easy filtering
- Very specific: line 384
Configurable: Use LOG_LEVEL if available
- Distinctive: line 408
Search for UserProfile component/function
- Distinctive: line 410
Add null check with logging
- Distinctive: line 432
Check regex or validation library usage
- Distinctive: line 434
Add logging for validation failures
- Distinctive: line 439
Check the fix plan first: - Always check the resolved fix plan path before anything else
- Distinctive: line 440
Plan mode = plan only: - When user chooses "Plan first", create the plan and STOP.
- Distinctive: line 441
Execute mode = follow the plan: - When the resolved fix plan exists, follow it step by step, then delete it
- Distinctive: line 442
NO reports: - Don't create summary documents (patches are learning artifacts, not reports)
- Distinctive: line 443
ALWAYS log: - Every fix must have logging for feedback
- Distinctive: line 446
Minimal changes: - Don't refactor unrelated code
- Distinctive: line 447
One fix at a time: - Don't scope creep
- Distinctive: line 448
Clean up: - Delete the resolved fix plan file after successful fix execution
- Very specific: line 450
Logging scope: - Keep [FIX] logging requirements for fixes.
- Distinctive: line 475
Create directory if it doesn't exist:
- Distinctive: line 481
Create a patch file with the current timestamp as filename.
- Distinctive: line 565
This is NOT optional: Every fix generates a patch.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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
Fix - Bug Fix Workflow
Fix a specific bug or problem in the codebase. Supports two modes: immediate fix or plan-first approach.
Workflow
Step 0 (pre): Detect Handoff Mode
Determine Handoff mode, task ID, and skip-review flag. If the caller passed HANDOFF_MODE, HANDOFF_TASK_ID, and HANDOFF_SKIP_REVIEW as explicit text in the prompt, use those values. Otherwise, use the Bash tool:
Bash: printenv HANDOFF_MODE || true
Bash: printenv HANDOFF_TASK_ID || true
Bash: printenv HANDOFF_SKIP_REVIEW || trueThen check HANDOFF_MODE:
When HANDOFF_MODE is 1 (autonomous Handoff agent)
The Handoff coordinator already manages status transitions and DB writes directly. Do NOT call MCP tools. Instead:
- No interactive questions: Do not use
AskUserQuestion. If$ARGUMENTScontains--plan-first, use "Plan first" mode. Otherwise default to "Fix now" mode. Always include tests and logging. - Plan annotation (MANDATORY): If
HANDOFF_TASK_IDis non-empty, you MUST insert<!-- handoff:task:<HANDOFF_TASK_ID> -->as the very first line of the fix plan file, before the title. Omitting this annotation when HANDOFF_TASK_ID is set is a bug — verify before completing. This applies to both Step 1.1 (creating new plan) and any plan rewrite.
When HANDOFF_MODE is NOT 1 (manual Claude Code session)
Handoff sync is handled inline — see Step 0.1 (after reading the fix plan file) for the task ID extraction and MCP sync trigger. The sync points are:
- Plan first (Step 1.1):
"planning"→"plan_ready"(after save) - Fix now (Step 2→5):
"implementing"(Step 2 entry) →"done"ifHANDOFF_SKIP_REVIEW=1, else"review"(Step 5) - Execute existing plan (Step 0.1→5):
"implementing"(Step 0.1) →"done"ifHANDOFF_SKIP_REVIEW=1, else"review"(Step 5)
CRITICAL: Always pass paused: true with every handoff_sync_status call except done.
When creating a new FIX_PLAN.md: if there is no existing annotation and no Handoff context, do not add the annotation.
Step 0: Load Config and Resolve Paths
FIRST: Read .ai-factory/config.yaml if it exists to resolve:
- Paths:
paths.description,paths.architecture,paths.rules_file,paths.rules,paths.fix_plan, andpaths.patches - Language:
language.uifor prompts - Rules:
rules.baseplus any namedrules.<area>entries
If config.yaml doesn't exist, use defaults:
- DESCRIPTION.md:
.ai-factory/DESCRIPTION.md - ARCHITECTURE.md:
.ai-factory/ARCHITECTURE.md - RULES.md:
.ai-factory/RULES.md - rules/:
.ai-factory/rules/ - FIX_PLAN.md:
.ai-factory/FIX_PLAN.md - patches/:
.ai-factory/patches/ - Language:
en(English)
Step 0.1: Check for Existing Fix Plan
BEFORE anything else after config resolution, check the resolved fix plan path (default: .ai-factory/FIX_PLAN.md).
If the file EXISTS:
- Read the resolved fix plan file
- Immediately check the first line for
<!-- handoff:task:<uuid> -->:- If found AND
HANDOFF_MODEis NOT1(manual session): extract the task ID. Callhandoff_sync_statuswith{ taskId: <extracted-id>, newStatus: "implementing", sourceTimestamp: "<current UTC time in ISO 8601 format>", direction: "aif_to_handoff", paused: true }. (Status is"implementing"because we are executing an existing plan, not creating one.) - If found AND
HANDOFF_MODEis1: the Handoff coordinator handles sync — do nothing. - If NOT found: no linked Handoff task — skip all MCP sync for the rest of this session.
- If found AND
- Inform the user: "Found existing fix plan. Executing fix based on the plan."
- Skip Step 1 (problem intake/mode choice), but still run Step 0.2 to load context
- Then continue to Step 2: Investigate the Codebase, using the plan as your guide
- Follow each step of the plan sequentially
- After the fix is fully applied and verified, delete the resolved fix plan file:
rm <resolved fix plan path> - Continue to Step 4 (Verify), Step 5 (Test suggestion), Step 6 (Patch)
If the file DOES NOT exist AND $ARGUMENTS is empty:
- Tell the user: "No fix plan found and no problem description provided. Please either provide a bug description (
$aif-fix <description>) or create a fix plan first." - STOP.
If the file DOES NOT exist AND $ARGUMENTS is provided:
- Continue to Step 0.2 below.
Step 0.2: Load Project Context & Past Experience
THEN: Read .ai-factory/DESCRIPTION.md (use path from config) if it exists to understand:
- Tech stack (language, framework, database)
- Project architecture
- Coding conventions
Also read .ai-factory/ARCHITECTURE.md (use path from config), the resolved RULES.md path, and the configured rules hierarchy when present to avoid fixes that violate project structure or local conventions.
Read .ai-factory/skill-context/aif-fix/SKILL.md — MANDATORY if the file exists.
This file contains project-specific rules accumulated by $aif-evolve from patches,
codebase conventions, and tech-stack analysis. These rules are tailored to the current project.
How to apply skill-context rules:
- Treat them as project-level overrides for this skill's general instructions
- When a skill-context rule conflicts with a general rule written in this SKILL.md, the skill-context rule wins (more specific context takes priority — same principle as nested CLAUDE.md files)
- When there is no conflict, apply both: general rules from SKILL.md + project rules from skill-context
- Do NOT ignore skill-context rules even if they seem to contradict this skill's defaults — they exist because the project's experience proved the default insufficient
- CRITICAL: skill-context rules apply to ALL outputs of this skill — including the FIX_PLAN.md template and patch files. The FIX_PLAN.md template in Step 1.1 is a base structure. If a skill-context rule says "steps MUST include X" or "plan MUST have section Y" — you MUST augment the template accordingly. Generating a FIX_PLAN.md or patch that violates skill-context rules is a bug.
Enforcement: After generating any output artifact, verify it against all skill-context rules. If any rule is violated — fix the output before presenting it to the user.
Patch fallback (limited, only when skill-context is missing):
- If
.ai-factory/skill-context/aif-fix/SKILL.mddoes not exist and the resolved patches dir exists:- Use
Globto find*.mdfiles in<resolved patches dir> - Sort patch filenames ascending (lexical), then select the last 10 (or fewer if less exist)
- Read those selected patch files only
- Prioritize recurring Root Cause and Prevention patterns
- Use
- If skill-context exists, do not read all patches by default.
- Optionally inspect a small, targeted subset of recent patches when tags/files clearly match the current bug.
Step 1: Understand the Problem & Choose Mode
From $ARGUMENTS, identify:
- Error message or unexpected behavior
- Where it occurs (file, function, endpoint)
- Steps to reproduce (if provided)
If unclear, ask:
To fix this effectively, I need more context:
1. What is the expected behavior?
2. What actually happens?
3. Can you share the error message/stack trace?
4. When did this start happening?After understanding the problem, ask the user to choose a mode using AskUserQuestion:
Question: "How would you like to proceed with the fix?"
Options:
- Fix now — Investigate and apply the fix immediately
- Plan first — Create a fix plan for review, then fix later
Based on choice:
- "Plan first" → Proceed to Step 1.1: Create Fix Plan
- "Fix now" → Skip Step 1.1, proceed directly to Step 2: Investigate the Codebase
Step 1.1: Create Fix Plan
Handoff sync (manual mode only): If a Handoff task ID is known (from HANDOFF_TASK_ID or an existing annotation) AND HANDOFF_MODE is NOT 1, call handoff_sync_status with { taskId: <id>, newStatus: "planning", sourceTimestamp: "<current UTC time in ISO 8601 format>", direction: "aif_to_handoff", paused: true }.
Investigate the codebase enough to understand the problem and create a plan.
Use the same parallel exploration approach as Step 2 — launch Explore agents to investigate the problem area, related code, and past patterns simultaneously.
After agents return, synthesize findings to:
- Identify the root cause (or most likely candidates)
- Map affected files and functions
- Assess impact scope
Then create the resolved fix plan file (default: .ai-factory/FIX_PLAN.md).
Before writing: If HANDOFF_MODE is 1 and HANDOFF_TASK_ID is non-empty, the very first line of the file MUST be <!-- handoff:task:<HANDOFF_TASK_ID> --> followed by a blank line, then the plan content below. If in manual mode and a task ID was extracted from an existing annotation, preserve it.
Structure:
# Fix Plan: [Brief title]
**Problem:** [What's broken — from user's description]
**Created:** YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm
## Analysis
What was found during investigation:
- Root cause (or suspected root cause)
- Affected files and functions
- Impact scope
## Fix Steps
Step-by-step plan for implementing the fix:
1. [ ] Step one — what to change and why
2. [ ] Step two — ...
3. [ ] Step three — ...
## Files to Modify
- `path/to/file.ts` — what changes are needed
- `path/to/another.ts` — what changes are needed
## Risks & Considerations
- Potential side effects
- Things to verify after the fix
- Edge cases to watch for
## Test Coverage
- What tests should be added
- What edge cases to coverAfter creating the plan, output:
## Fix Plan Created ✅
Plan saved to the resolved fix plan path.
Review the plan and when you're ready to execute, run:
$aif-fixHandoff sync (manual mode only): If a Handoff task ID is known AND HANDOFF_MODE is NOT 1, call handoff_push_plan with { taskId: <id>, planContent: <full fix plan text> }, then handoff_sync_status with { taskId: <id>, newStatus: "plan_ready", sourceTimestamp: "<current UTC time in ISO 8601 format>", direction: "aif_to_handoff", paused: true }.
STOP here. Do NOT apply the fix.
Step 2: Investigate the Codebase
Handoff sync (manual mode, "Fix now" path only): If a Handoff task ID is known AND HANDOFF_MODE is NOT 1, call handoff_sync_status with { taskId: <id>, newStatus: "implementing", sourceTimestamp: "<current UTC time in ISO 8601 format>", direction: "aif_to_handoff", paused: true }.
Use Task tool with subagent_type: Explore to investigate the problem in parallel. This keeps the main context clean and allows simultaneous investigation of multiple angles.
Launch 2-3 Explore agents simultaneously:
Agent 1 — Locate the problem area:
Task(subagent_type: Explore, model: sonnet, prompt:
"Find code related to [error location / affected functionality].
Read the relevant functions, trace the data flow.
Thoroughness: medium.")
Agent 2 — Related code & side effects:
Task(subagent_type: Explore, model: sonnet, prompt:
"Find all callers/consumers of [affected function/module].
Identify what else might break or be affected.
Thoroughness: medium.")
Agent 3 — Similar past patterns (if patches exist):
Task(subagent_type: Explore, model: sonnet, prompt:
"Search for similar error patterns or related fixes in the codebase.
Check git log for recent changes to [affected files].
Thoroughness: quick.")After agents return, synthesize findings to identify:
- The root cause (not just symptoms)
- Related code that might be affected
- Existing error handling
Fallback: If Task tool is unavailable, investigate directly:
- Find relevant files using Glob/Grep
- Read the code around the issue
- Trace the data flow
- Check for similar patterns elsewhere
Step 3: Implement the Fix
Apply the fix with logging:
// ✅ REQUIRED: Add logging around the fix
console.log("[FIX] Processing user input", { userId, input });
try {
// The actual fix
const result = fixedLogic(input);
console.log("[FIX] Success", { userId, result });
return result;
} catch (error) {
console.error("[FIX] Error in fixedLogic", {
userId,
input,
error: error.message,
stack: error.stack,
});
throw error;
}Logging is MANDATORY because:
- User needs to verify the fix works
- If it doesn't work, logs help debug further
- Feedback loop: user provides logs → we iterate
Step 4: Verify the Fix
- Check the code compiles/runs
- Verify the logic is correct
- Ensure no regressions introduced
Step 5: Suggest Test Coverage
Handoff sync (manual mode ONLY — skip entirely when HANDOFF_MODE is 1): If a Handoff task ID is known AND HANDOFF_MODE is NOT 1:
- Call
handoff_push_planwith{ taskId: <id>, planContent: <fix summary or updated plan> }. - If
HANDOFF_SKIP_REVIEWis1: callhandoff_sync_statuswith{ taskId: <id>, newStatus: "done", sourceTimestamp: "<current UTC time in ISO 8601 format>", direction: "aif_to_handoff", paused: false }. - Otherwise: call
handoff_sync_statuswith{ taskId: <id>, newStatus: "review", sourceTimestamp: "<current UTC time in ISO 8601 format>", direction: "aif_to_handoff", paused: true }.
ALWAYS suggest covering this case with a test:
## Fix Applied ✅
The issue was: [brief explanation]
Fixed by: [what was changed]
### Logging Added
The fix includes logging with prefix `[FIX]`.
Please test and share any logs if issues persist.
### Recommended: Add a Test
This bug should be covered by a test to prevent regression:
\`\`\`typescript
describe('functionName', () => {
it('should handle [the edge case that caused the bug]', () => {
// Arrange
const input = /* the problematic input */;
// Act
const result = functionName(input);
// Assert
expect(result).toBe(/* expected */);
});
});
\`\`\`
AskUserQuestion: Would you like me to create this test?
Options:
1. Yes, create the test
2. No, skip for nowHandling the user's response:
- If "Yes, create the test":
- Create the test file in the appropriate test directory (follow project conventions)
- Include the suggested test case and any additional edge cases related to the fix
- Run the test to verify it passes
- Then proceed to Step 6: Create Self-Improvement Patch
- If "No, skip for now":
- Proceed directly to Step 6: Create Self-Improvement Patch
Logging Requirements
All fixes MUST include logging:
- Log prefix: Use
[FIX]or[FIX:<issue-id>]for easy filtering - Log inputs: What data was being processed
- Log success: Confirm the fix worked
- Log errors: Full context if something fails
- Configurable: Use LOG_LEVEL if available
// Pattern for fixes
const LOG_FIX = process.env.LOG_LEVEL === "debug" || process.env.DEBUG_FIX;
function fixedFunction(input) {
if (LOG_FIX) console.log("[FIX] Input:", input);
// ... fix logic ...
if (LOG_FIX) console.log("[FIX] Output:", result);
return result;
}Examples
Example 1: Null Reference Error
User: $aif-fix TypeError: Cannot read property 'name' of undefined in UserProfile
Actions:
- Search for UserProfile component/function
- Find where
.nameis accessed - Add null check with logging
- Suggest test for null user case
Example 2: API Returns Wrong Data
User: $aif-fix /api/orders returns empty array for authenticated users
Actions:
- Find orders API endpoint
- Trace the query logic
- Find the bug (e.g., wrong filter)
- Fix with logging
- Suggest integration test
Example 3: Form Validation Not Working
User: $aif-fix email validation accepts invalid emails
Actions:
- Find email validation logic
- Check regex or validation library usage
- Fix the validation
- Add logging for validation failures
- Suggest unit test with edge cases
Important Rules
- Check the fix plan first - Always check the resolved fix plan path before anything else
- Plan mode = plan only - When user chooses "Plan first", create the plan and STOP. Do NOT fix.
- Execute mode = follow the plan - When the resolved fix plan exists, follow it step by step, then delete it
- NO reports - Don't create summary documents (patches are learning artifacts, not reports)
- ALWAYS log - Every fix must have logging for feedback
- ALWAYS suggest tests - Help prevent regressions
- Root cause - Fix the actual problem, not symptoms
- Minimal changes - Don't refactor unrelated code
- One fix at a time - Don't scope creep
- Clean up - Delete the resolved fix plan file after successful fix execution
- Ownership boundary -
$aif-fixownspaths.fix_planandpaths.patches; treat.ai-factory/DESCRIPTION.md, roadmap, rules, and architecture context artifacts as read-only unless the user explicitly requests otherwise - Logging scope - Keep
[FIX]logging requirements for fixes; context-gate outputs in this command should useWARN/ERRORand must not change global logging policy in other skills
After Fixing
Use this output template in Step 5 (before the AskUserQuestion about tests):
## Fix Applied ✅
**Issue:** [what was broken]
**Cause:** [why it was broken]
**Fix:** [what was changed]
**Files modified:**
- path/to/file.ts (line X)
**Logging added:** Yes, prefix `[FIX]`Step 6: Create Self-Improvement Patch
ALWAYS create a patch after every fix. This builds a knowledge base for future fixes.
Create the patch:
Create directory if it doesn't exist:
mkdir -p <resolved patches dir>- Create a patch file with the current timestamp as filename.
Format:
YYYY-MM-DD-HH.mm.md(e.g.,2026-02-07-14.30.md) - Use this template:
# [Brief title describing the fix]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm
**Files:** list of modified files
**Severity:** low | medium | high | critical
## Problem
What was broken. How it manifested (error message, wrong behavior).
Be specific — include the actual error or symptom.
## Root Cause
WHY the problem occurred. This is the most valuable part.
Not "what was wrong" but "why it was wrong":
- Logic error? Why was the logic incorrect?
- Missing check? Why was it missing?
- Wrong assumption? What was assumed?
- Race condition? What sequence caused it?
## Solution
How the fix was implemented. Key code changes and reasoning.
Include the approach, not just "changed line X".
## Prevention
How to prevent this class of problems in the future:
- What pattern/practice should be followed?
- What should be checked during code review?
- What test would catch this?
## Tags
Space-separated tags for categorization, e.g.:
`#null-check` `#async` `#validation` `#typescript` `#api` `#database`Example patch:
# Null reference in UserProfile when user has no avatar
**Date:** 2026-02-07 14:30
**Files:** src/components/UserProfile.tsx
**Severity:** medium
## Problem
TypeError: Cannot read property 'url' of undefined when rendering
UserProfile for users without an uploaded avatar.
## Root Cause
The `user.avatar` field is optional in the database schema but the
component accessed `user.avatar.url` without a null check. This was
introduced in commit abc123 when avatar display was added — the
developer tested only with users that had avatars.
## Solution
Added optional chaining: `user.avatar?.url` with a fallback to a
default avatar URL. Also added a null check in the Avatar sub-component.
## Prevention
- Always check if database fields marked as `nullable` / `optional`
are handled with null checks in the UI layer
- Add test cases for "empty state" — user with minimal data
- Consider a lint rule for accessing nested optional properties
## Tags
`#null-check` `#react` `#optional-field` `#typescript`This is NOT optional. Every fix generates a patch. The patch is your learning.
Context Cleanup
Suggest the user to free up context space if needed: /clear (full reset) or /compact (compress history).
DO NOT:
- ❌ Apply a fix when user chose "Plan first" - only create the fix plan and stop
- ❌ Skip the fix-plan check at the start
- ❌ Leave the fix plan after successful fix execution - always delete it
- ❌ Generate reports or summaries (patches are NOT reports — they are learning artifacts)
- ❌ Refactor unrelated code
- ❌ Add features while fixing
- ❌ Skip logging
- ❌ Skip test suggestion
- ❌ Skip patch creation
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.

