Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

systematic-debugging

Finds the root cause of a bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior before proposing any fix. Use this whenever something is broken and the cause is not yet proven — a failing test, a production error, intermittent behavior, or a symptom that appeared after a change. Also use when a fix has been attempted and did not work, or when the same bug keeps coming back.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

See how to install

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md2.6 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Systematic debugging

The rule

No fix before the cause is proven. A change that makes a symptom disappear without an explanation has not fixed anything — it has moved the failure somewhere you are not looking.

Method

  1. Reproduce it deterministically. If you cannot make it happen on demand, you cannot know when it is fixed. Intermittent means you have not found the variable yet — order, timing, state, environment, data.
  2. Narrow the blast radius. Bisect: which commit, which input, which branch, which layer. Halve the search space with each step rather than reading everything.
  3. State a hypothesis that can be wrong. "The cache returns stale rows after a write" is a hypothesis. "Something is wrong with caching" is not.
  4. Test the hypothesis directly — a log line, a breakpoint, a probe. Prove it, do not infer it.
  5. Explain the whole symptom. If your cause explains the error but not why it started Tuesday, you have found a bug, not the bug.
  6. Fix, then verify by reverting. Put the bug back and confirm the test fails again. This is the step people skip, and it is the one that proves causation rather than coincidence.

Anti-patterns

  • Shotgun changes — altering several things at once. Now you cannot attribute the fix.
  • "Probably a flake." Not a diagnosis. A test that fails intermittently is reporting a real race, ordering dependency, or shared-state leak.
  • Fixing the symptom — catching the exception, adding a retry, widening a timeout — without knowing what threw it.
  • Trusting the error message's location. Where it surfaced is rarely where it originated.

Never

  • Close a bug without a reproduction that failed before the fix and passes after it.
  • Deploy a change to production to find out whether it works. Reproduce somewhere you can observe first.
  • Change the environment and the code in the same step.
  • Leave a debugging aid in the code as the fix — a widened timeout, a disabled check, a swallowed exception.

Return contract

State the reproduction, the proven cause, the fix, and the verification that the fix addresses that cause specifically. Name anything you ruled out and how.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process. Use this to design a permissions model, run an access review, reduce standing privilege, handle offboarding, set up SSO or MFA, manage service and machine credentials, or diagnose why permissions have sprawled.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

cbrock84/headcount2.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

cbrock84/headcount2.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account. Use this to design or fix signup and onboarding, diagnose why signups do not convert to active use, reduce time-to-value, or decide what a new user must accomplish first.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

cbrock84/headcount2.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

cbrock84/headcount2.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

cbrock84/headcount2.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an opinion.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

cbrock84/headcount2.1KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

See all skills by cbrock84

Report a problem with this skill