agentleFS
markoblogomarkoblogo/abvx-agent-skills/skills/diagnose/SKILL.md

diagnose

Skill16 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Debug coding failures through reproduction, ranked hypotheses, narrow fixes, and verification. Use when a bug, regression, flaky test, performance failure, or inconsistent behavior is broken, slow, throwing, or hard to reproduce and the task needs disciplined diagnosis instead of guessed fixes.

193 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use zoom-out, to-prd 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.
  • victorgarciaesgiSkill

    zoom-out

    Tell the agent to zoom out and give broader context or a higher-level perspective. Use when you're unfamiliar with a section of code or need to understand how it fits into the bigger picture.

    Also in 61 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    to-prd

    Turn the current conversation into a PRD and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.

    Also in 56 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    to-issues

    Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices.

    Also in 53 projects that use this

  • simo97Skill

    edit-article

    The user will invoke this skill to help them edit an article.

    Also in 17 projects that use this

  • simo97Skill

    write-a-skill

    Create new agent skills with proper structure, progressive disclosure, and bundled resources. Use when user wants to create, write, or build a new skill.

    Also in 44 projects that use this

  • AnasX7Skill

    setup-pre-commit

    Set up Husky pre-commit hooks with lint-staged (Prettier), type checking, and tests in the current repo. Use when user wants to add pre-commit hooks, set up Husky, configure lint-staged, or add commit-time formatting/typechecking/testing.

    Also in 27 projects that use this

  • +4 more from simo97

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 174 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 7

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Create the smallest useful pass/fail signal:

    line 17
  2. Distinctive:

    If no loop can be built, state what was tried and ask for logs, traces, access, or permission to instrument.

    line 27
  3. Distinctive:

    Write 3-5 ranked hypotheses before editing.

    line 37
  4. Distinctive:

    Test one variable at a time.

    line 47
  5. Distinctive:

    Prefer debugger, REPL, targeted logs, traces, or profiler over broad logging.

    line 51
  6. Distinctive:

    Remove all temporary instrumentation before finalizing.

    line 53
  7. Distinctive:

    If a correct seam exists, turn the minimized repro into a failing regression check before the fix.

    line 58
  8. Very specific:

    When the task needs an auditable incident, device, CI/runtime, or regression record, hand the established reproducer and verification …

    line 66

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 174 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Diagnose

The core job is to build a reliable feedback loop. Without one, hypotheses are weak.

Phase 1: Feedback Loop

Create the smallest useful pass/fail signal:

  • failing test;
  • CLI command with fixture;
  • HTTP request against local server;
  • browser script;
  • replayed trace or payload;
  • small harness around the relevant function;
  • repeated flake trigger with counted failure rate.

If no loop can be built, state what was tried and ask for logs, traces, access, or permission to instrument.

Phase 2: Reproduce

Confirm the loop matches the user's symptom, not a nearby failure. Capture exact error text, wrong output, timing, network failure, or UI state.

For nondeterministic issues, raise the reproduction rate with repetition, stress, seeded randomness, timing controls, and isolation.

Phase 3: Hypothesize

Write 3-5 ranked hypotheses before editing. Each must include:

Hypothesis:
Prediction:
Probe:
Result:
Status:

Test one variable at a time. Update rankings as evidence arrives.

Phase 4: Instrument

  • Prefer debugger, REPL, targeted logs, traces, or profiler over broad logging.
  • Tag temporary instrumentation with a unique marker such as [DEBUG-7b3c].
  • Remove all temporary instrumentation before finalizing.
  • For performance regressions, measure first and fix second.

Phase 5: Fix And Regression Test

If a correct seam exists, turn the minimized repro into a failing regression check before the fix. If no correct seam exists, document that as an architecture gap.

Apply the smallest fix supported by evidence, then rerun:

  • the regression check;
  • the original feedback loop;
  • relevant project checks.

When the task needs an auditable incident, device, CI/runtime, or regression record, hand the established reproducer and verification commands to bug-evidence-protocol. That protocol records proof; it does not replace this diagnostic loop.

Final Report

Include root cause, winning hypothesis, files changed, verification, debug cleanup, and residual risk.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.