AI-powered adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector design for gene therapy including capsid engineering, promoter selection, and tropism optimization.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Systematically trace bugs backward through call stack to find original trigger
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
설치 방법 보기설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.
Bugs often manifest deep in the call stack (git init in wrong directory, file created in wrong location, database opened with wrong path). Your instinct is to fix where the error appears, but that's treating a symptom.
Core principle: Trace backward through the call chain until you find the original trigger, then fix at the source.
digraph when_to_use {
"Bug appears deep in stack?" [shape=diamond];
"Can trace backwards?" [shape=diamond];
"Fix at symptom point" [shape=box];
"Trace to original trigger" [shape=box];
"BETTER: Also add defense-in-depth" [shape=box];
"Bug appears deep in stack?" -> "Can trace backwards?" [label="yes"];
"Can trace backwards?" -> "Trace to original trigger" [label="yes"];
"Can trace backwards?" -> "Fix at symptom point" [label="no - dead end"];
"Trace to original trigger" -> "BETTER: Also add defense-in-depth";
}
Use when:
Error: git init failed in /Users/jesse/project/packages/core
What code directly causes this?
await execFileAsync('git', ['init'], { cwd: projectDir });
WorktreeManager.createSessionWorktree(projectDir, sessionId)
→ called by Session.initializeWorkspace()
→ called by Session.create()
→ called by test at Project.create()
What value was passed?
projectDir = '' (empty string!)cwd resolves to process.cwd()Where did empty string come from?
const context = setupCoreTest(); // Returns { tempDir: '' }
Project.create('name', context.tempDir); // Accessed before beforeEach!
When you can't trace manually, add instrumentation:
// Before the problematic operation
async function gitInit(directory: string) {
const stack = new Error().stack;
console.error('DEBUG git init:', {
directory,
cwd: process.cwd(),
nodeEnv: process.env.NODE_ENV,
stack,
});
await execFileAsync('git', ['init'], { cwd: directory });
}
Critical: Use console.error() in tests (not logger - may not show)
Run and capture:
npm test 2>&1 | grep 'DEBUG git init'
Analyze stack traces:
If something appears during tests but you don't know which test:
Use the bisection script: @find-polluter.sh
./find-polluter.sh '.git' 'src/**/*.test.ts'
Runs tests one-by-one, stops at first polluter. See script for usage.
Symptom: .git created in packages/core/ (source code)
Trace chain:
git init runs in process.cwd() ← empty cwd parametercontext.tempDir before beforeEach{ tempDir: '' } initiallyRoot cause: Top-level variable initialization accessing empty value
Fix: Made tempDir a getter that throws if accessed before beforeEach
Also added defense-in-depth:
digraph principle {
"Found immediate cause" [shape=ellipse];
"Can trace one level up?" [shape=diamond];
"Trace backwards" [shape=box];
"Is this the source?" [shape=diamond];
"Fix at source" [shape=box];
"Add validation at each layer" [shape=box];
"Bug impossible" [shape=doublecircle];
"NEVER fix just the symptom" [shape=octagon, style=filled, fillcolor=red, fontcolor=white];
"Found immediate cause" -> "Can trace one level up?";
"Can trace one level up?" -> "Trace backwards" [label="yes"];
"Can trace one level up?" -> "NEVER fix just the symptom" [label="no"];
"Trace backwards" -> "Is this the source?";
"Is this the source?" -> "Trace backwards" [label="no - keeps going"];
"Is this the source?" -> "Fix at source" [label="yes"];
"Fix at source" -> "Add validation at each layer";
"Add validation at each layer" -> "Bug impossible";
}
NEVER fix just where the error appears. Trace back to find the original trigger.
In tests: Use console.error() not logger - logger may be suppressed
Before operation: Log before the dangerous operation, not after it fails
Include context: Directory, cwd, environment variables, timestamps
Capture stack: new Error().stack shows complete call chain
From debugging session (2025-10-03):
This skill is written to stay usable across GitHub Copilot, Claude Code, and Codex.
$CODEX_HOME/skills/root-cause-tracing and restart Codex after major changes.Preferred MCP Server: None required
root-cause-tracing outside its documented task boundary.Before claiming the root-cause-tracing workflow succeeded:
아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.
로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.
아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.
AI-powered adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector design for gene therapy including capsid engineering, promoter selection, and tropism optimization.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Improve the clarity and voice of AI-assisted academic writing (papers, theses, rebuttals) and
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
12-agent academic paper writing pipeline. 11 modes (full/plan/outline/revision/revision-coach/abstract/lit-review/format-convert/citation-check/disclosure/rebuttal-audit). 6 paper types, 5 citation formats, bilingual abstracts, LaTeX/DOCX-via-Pandoc/PDF output. Style Calibration + Writing Quality Check + Anti-Patterns with IRON RULE markers. Triggers: write paper, academic paper, guide my paper, parse reviews, audit my rebuttal, check my response draft, AI disclosure, 寫論文, 學術論文, 引導我寫論文, 審查意見, 評估回覆, 논문 작성, 초록 작성, 논문 수정, 논문 계획을 도와줘, 심사 의견 반영, 답변서 점검, AI 사용 고지.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality checks.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Runs a 5-seat, role-separated review panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer + 3 peer-review roles + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise; role separation is not a claim of independent error processes. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy, 審查論文, 論文審查, 模擬審查, 同儕審查, 幫我審這篇, 以審查人角度評估, 審查者校準, 논문 심사, 동료 심사, 모의 심사, 심사자 관점에서 평가, 심사자 보정.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Systematic strategic planning framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers targeting preprint platforms (PhilArchive, arXiv, PhilSci-Archive). Use when users want to: (1) plan a paper on a specific topic, (2) identify research gaps and assess originality, (3) develop optimized paper outlines, (4) prepare for preprint submission, or (5) understand platform requirements and writing standards. Triggered by phrases like 'plan a paper on,' 'help me design a paper about,' 'identify research gaps in,' 'is this idea original,' or when users need structured research planning. The skill guides through three phases: Platform Analysis (identifying target venue and studying sample papers), Theoretical Framework (AI-driven literature search and gap identification), and Outline Optimization (structured design with reviewer-perspective self-assessment). Each phase includes quality evaluation standards and validation checkpoints.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.