本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

fault-localize

Find the earliest decisive failure in an agent run trace and propose an evidence-backed targeted repair. Load when a run failed, results are wrong, or the user asks what went wrong in an agent session. Also triggers on "localize the fault", "first incorrect step", "debug this run", "trace attribution", "why did the agent fail", or after run-trace captures errors. Pairs with debug-and-fix for code defects and dynamic-routing for plan faults.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md3.7 KB
  • references/examples.md685 B
  • references/LOCALIZATION.md1.6 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Fault Localize

You find the earliest decisive divergence in a trace, hypothesize cause from evidence, apply a targeted repair, replay from that point, and verify an outcome flip. No vague retries.

Hard Rules

Require a trace file (.agent-loom/traces/<run-id>.jsonl) or reconstruct from session tool history. Follow references/LOCALIZATION.md — earliest error/divergence wins. Hypothesis must cite output_ref or error from the trace record. Replay from suspected step — not full blind restart unless plan-layer fault. Record attribution with outcome_flip boolean. Route code defects to debug-and-fix; plan faults to dynamic-routing.


Workflow

Step 1 — Load trace

Run trace_query.py timeline and errors. If no trace, build minimal timeline from session history.

Step 2 — Identify suspected step

Earliest record with error or output contradicting expected. State suspected_step_id.

Step 3 — Write hypothesis

Three lines max — cite evidence. Classify layer.

Step 4 — Propose targeted repair

One intervention matched to layer. Not a kitchen-sink fix.

Step 5 — Replay and verify

Re-run from suspected step. Compare outcome.

Step 6 — Attribute

Write attribution record. If no flip, consider next candidate step.


Gotchas

  • Latest error ≠ earliest cause — always scan chronologically.
  • Fixing symptoms downstream masks upstream plan errors.
  • Flaky tests need two replays before attributing.

Output Format

## Fault localization — [run_id]

Suspected step: **Sx** @ [ts]
Hypothesis: [evidence-cited]
Layer: [tooling|code|plan|environment]

Proposed repair: [one intervention]
Replay result: [pass|fail]
Outcome flip: [true|false]

Attribution: `.agent-loom/traces/[run_id]-attribution.json`
Next: [resume plan | debug-and-fix | escalate]

Examples

Teaser: Trace shows S1 pass, S2 npm test fail → hypothesize missing env → repair .env.example → replay S2 → flip true.

Full pairs: references/examples.md


Common Rationalizations

ExcuseReality
"Last error is the cause"Downstream errors are often symptoms.
"Retry whole run"Expensive; masks localized fix opportunity.
"Guess and patch"Hypothesis without evidence → wrong attribution.
"Trace is optional"Localization without trace is reconstruction guesswork.
"One flip proves root cause"Flaky tests need confirmatory replay.

Verification

  • Suspected step is earliest divergence
  • Hypothesis cites trace evidence
  • Attribution record written
  • Layer-appropriate handoff if not fixed

Red Flags

  • Hypothesis with no trace citation
  • Full rerun without identifying suspected step
  • outcome_flip true on single flaky test

Prune Log

Last pruned: 2026-07-05

  • Initial release from high-leverage skill spec (Skill 4 family)

Impact Report

Localize: [run_id] | Suspected: [step] | Flip: [bool] | Layer: [layer]

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Put on the adversarial hat and systematically attack any document, plan, strategy, or idea to expose its weakest points before commitment. Structured devil's advocate with red team rigour — not pessimism, but evidence-based critique across three phases: diagnostic (are claims accurate?), creative (is the problem artificially constrained?), challenge (are solutions robust?). Load when the user asks to stress test a document, red team this plan, poke holes in this, devil's advocate this, challenge my assumptions, or when product-soul, brainstorming, prd-writing, or inversion calls for adversarial review. Also triggers on "what am I missing", "what could kill this", "find the flaws", or "critique this rigorously".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Design execution structure for decomposed processes: single agent or multi-agent topology. Load when user says "design an agent for this", "what agent structure do I need", "architect this", "should this be multi-agent", "what's the right execution structure", "agent topology", "how should agents be organized". Takes process-decomposer output as primary input. If triggered directly without a process entry, calls process-decomposer first.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Internal skill. Called by setup-evaluation after a PASS. Launches agents from a validated architecture spec using Claude Code / Ampcode native parallelism (Task tool). Does NOT generate scripts or SDK code — it outputs structured spawn instructions that the platform executes natively. Never invoked directly by the user. Never launches without a setup-evaluation PASS.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Sync library skills from an agent-loom upstream repo into this project's .agents/skills while preserving project-local and forked skills. Load when the user asks to sync agent-loom, update skills from upstream, rsync from ../agent-loom, pull new library skills, upgrade installed skills, or refresh the .agents folder without losing custom project skills. Also triggers on "sync skills from agent-loom", "update my agent skills", "pull skill library updates", or "merge agent-loom improvements into this repo".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Instrument a shipped product's AI agents with tracing and observability so you can see what they did, why outputs happened, and what each run cost. Plain-language primer plus free-tier-first backend selection (Langfuse, Phoenix, LangSmith, Braintrust) and OpenTelemetry/OpenInference instrumentation. Load when the user asks to add observability, add tracing, instrument my agents, see what my agent is doing in production, set up Langfuse or Phoenix or LangSmith, debug why my agent gave a bad answer, or track LLM cost per request. Also fires when agent-system-architecture or setup-evaluation requires an observability plan for an agent-chain product. NOT for tracing the coding agent itself — that is run-trace. Precondition for runtime-learning-loop.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Run a structured retrospective after development-phase runs of your product's agents — interview the owner in plain language about what went well and poorly, draft ranked improvement hypotheses, then design and run small n=1/n=2 experiments with pre-declared success criteria, guardrails, stop conditions, and a cost/ROI kill-switch. Load when the user says how did that run go, retro this run, the agent output was bad, what should we improve, draft hypotheses, run a small experiment, or after repeated dev runs of an agentic system produce uneven quality. Priority: output quality over performance over cost, each with diminishing-returns stops. NOT a product A/B test (experimentation), NOT coding-agent harness repair (harness-evolution), NOT production-scale learning (runtime-learning-loop).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

dvy1987 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する