fix-bug
Skill2 starsChanged 24 days agoMITView on GitHub
The bug-fix role — take one bug bead, reproduce it with a failing test of the agent's choice, fix the implementation, and merge once the new and existing tests are green.
40 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Doist/todoist-aitheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- Doist/todoist-clitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- danielvm-git/bigpowerstheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- tddworks/ClaudeBartheir own version, first seen Nov 3, 2026
- mthines/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 30, 2026
- aantoniadis/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use improvement, build-feature 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.
kiminmonacoSkillimprovement
Guide for making improvements to existing ClaudeBar functionality using TDD. Use this skill when: (1) Enhancing existing features (not adding new ones) (2) Improving UX, performance, or code quality (3) User asks "improve X", "make Y better", or "enhance Z" (4) Small enhancements that don't require full architecture design For NEW features, use implement-feature skill instead.
Also in 4 projects that use this
sirakinbSkillbuild-feature
Autonomous task loop that picks ready tasks, implements them, updates progress.txt, commits, and repeats. Use when asked to 'build feature', 'run the loop', or 'implement these tasks'.
Also in 5 projects that use this
kiminmonacoSkillimplement-feature
Guide for implementing features in ClaudeBar following architecture-first design, TDD, rich domain models, and Swift 6.2 patterns. Use this skill when: (1) Adding new functionality to the app (2) Creating domain models that follow user's mental model (3) Building SwiftUI views that consume domain models directly (4) User asks "how do I implement X" or "add feature Y" (5) Implementing any feature that spans Domain, Infrastructure, and App layers
Also in 7 projects that use this
SentrySkillwrite-tests
Write tests following project conventions. Use when adding new tests or modifying existing ones.
Also in 6 projects that use this
JetBrainsSkillcreate-plan
Research the codebase and create an implementation plan with architecture notes, design document, and track decomposition. Use when starting a new feature or large change.
Also in 4 projects that use this
JasonPaffSkillimplement-plan
Execute implementation plan with structured tracking and validation using subagent architecture
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions40 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 40
- remix-run/react-router★ 57ksame name
- ktorio/ktor★ 15ksame name
- JetBrains/Exposed★ 9.3ksame name
- bytebase/dbhub★ 3.8ksame name
- The-OpenROAD-Project/OpenROAD★ 3.3ksame name
- JamieMason/syncpack★ 2.1ksame name
- tddworks/ClaudeBar★ 1.6ksame name
- Harry-kp/vortix★ 757same name
- Doist/todoist-ai★ 563same name
- tddworks/asc-cli★ 393same name
30 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 repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agree-experienceSkill
- beads-workflowSkill
- produce-beadSkill
- project-definitionSkill
- verify-beadSkill
- write-beadSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 40 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 26
Start from the bead's bug claim: Read the bead, and for a gh-<n> bead the issue.
- Very specific: line 35
Keep existing behaviour green: Run the new test and the existing relevant tests, then the fast gate produce-bead *Building* names.
- Distinctive: line 62
Write it for someone who has not read the code: the verifier turns *How to trigger it by hand* into the manual check, and a test name alone …
- Very specific: line 76
Use the second-look form of that block when a verification:failed bug has nothing left to fix: the behaviour the navigator saw is already …
- Distinctive: line 79
When handing back, append notes that name what you tried, what test surface you attempted, and what decision or missing information blocks …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 40 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
Fixing a bug bead
Take one bugfix bead from report to merge. The route is fixed: reproduce first, then fix. A
bug bead never went through UX and never will: it carries no ux:agreed, no ux:none and no
mockup, and scripts/bugfix-candidates is the one queue it is handed from.
Follow skills/produce-bead/SKILL.md for everything that is not the contract below, with
these readings: the State file and its phases (design while you read the bead and decide the
test, then build, gate, review, ci, rebase, merge); Workspace and its ports;
Building, whose fast gate you run before the PR; Waiting, without ending your run; The review
loop, where the reviewer reads the diff against the bead's bug claim and your reproduction
test, since a bug bead has no plan, and your posted review says so in place of "the plan";
Red CI; Merging; The retrospective; Finishing, the parent walk included; and The
navigator's gates, where your plan gate puts the reproduction test and the fix you intend to the
navigator before you touch the implementation, and review and merge read as written. You write
no design and add no planned: the reproduction test is the plan. Known traps from
.cerebro/traps.md are read before you touch the code.
The bug-fix contract
- Start from the bead's bug claim. Read the bead, and for a
gh-<n>bead the issue; identify the concrete behaviour that is wrong. A bead carryingverification:failedis a fix the navigator saw fail: read the dated failure note first, and what shipped (git log origin/main -F --grep "(<id>):"), before choosing the test. - Reproduce with a test before touching implementation code. Choose the test type yourself: unit, integration, end-to-end, or another existing test shape in the repository.
- Make the reproduction test fail for the right reason. The failure must be the bug the bead describes, not an unrelated setup or fixture failure.
- Fix the implementation with the smallest coherent change that makes the new test pass.
- Keep existing behaviour green. Run the new test and the existing relevant tests, then the
fast gate
produce-beadBuilding names. - Log the bug on the bead before you open the pull request, so the reviewer reads it and the verifier later decides from it how to check the fix by hand (below).
- Merge only through the pull request, after review and green checks (
produce-beadMerging), then close the bead, close its parent if you were the last child, and end the pass. A bead is never closed without its bug log.
Logging the bug
One note, appended when the fix is green and before the pull request, under this heading so the verifier finds it:
bd update <id> --append-notes "## The bug, as fixed
**What was wrong:** <the wrong behaviour as a person or a caller met it, and its cause in the code>
**How the test triggers it:** <the test's file and name; the input, state or sequence of actions it
sets up; what it asserted, and what it got before the fix>
**How to trigger it by hand:** <the steps in the running application that showed the bug, taken
from the test's setup: where to start, what to do, what you saw before and should see now; or
\"Not reachable by hand:\" and why>"
bd dolt pushWrite it for someone who has not read the code: the verifier turns How to trigger it by hand into the manual check, and a test name alone tells them nothing. If review changes the cause or the test, append a corrected note under the same heading; the last one is the one that stands.
When to hand back instead of forcing a fix
A bug is never parked for UX: producer-park refuses a bugfix bead, since the UX queue excludes
it. Hand it back through produce-bead Handing back, the human form, when:
- the bead does not describe a reproducible bug,
- the bead's expected behaviour is ambiguous enough to need a product decision,
- or reproducing it would require a test surface that does not exist and cannot reasonably be added within the bead's scope.
Use the second-look form of that block when a verification:failed bug has nothing left to
fix: the behaviour the navigator saw is already gone from main, or another bead carries it.
When handing back, append notes that name what you tried, what test surface you attempted, and what decision or missing information blocks a correct fix.
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.

