agentleFS
voyager67voyager67/AgentFieldkit/skills/failure-forensics/SKILL.md

failure-forensics

Skill0 starsChanged 13 days agoMITView on GitHub

Diagnose a reproducible software failure by narrowing symptoms to a root cause and verifying the repair. Use for crashes, incorrect results, flaky tests, and hard-to-explain regressions.

3 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use a minimal experiment to falsify the leading hypothesis.

    line 14
  2. Distinctive:

    Do not delete user data, reset a database, clear caches with side effects, or change production state to diagnose a local bug without …

    line 26
  3. Distinctive:

    Treat timing correlation as a clue, not proof of causation.

    line 28

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 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

Failure Forensics

Procedure

  1. Capture the exact symptom: error message, stack trace, inputs, environment, frequency, and when it started. Redact secrets and personal data.
  2. Reproduce the failure with the smallest reliable command or test. If reproduction is impossible, say so and gather the best available evidence.
  3. Form a few competing hypotheses. Rank them by consistency with observed evidence, not by familiarity.
  4. Trace values from input to failure. Inspect recent changes, boundary conditions, async ordering, state mutation, configuration, and dependency behavior where relevant.
  5. Use a minimal experiment to falsify the leading hypothesis. Change one variable at a time when practical.
  6. Fix the root cause rather than masking the symptom. Add a regression test that would have caught it.
  7. Repeat the reproduction and run neighboring tests. Inspect logs and output to ensure no new error path was introduced.

Report

  • Reproduction steps and observed result
  • Root cause, with specific file/symbol evidence
  • Minimal repair
  • Regression test and verification results
  • Remaining uncertainty, if any

Boundaries

  • Do not delete user data, reset a database, clear caches with side effects, or change production state to diagnose a local bug without explicit authorization.
  • Preserve failing artifacts and logs when they are needed to understand the issue.
  • Treat timing correlation as a clue, not proof of causation.

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.