本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

ase-meta-why

Five-Whys Root-Cause Analysis.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md7.5 KB
  • help.md3.3 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。

@${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-control.md @${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-skill.md @${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-getopt.md

<purpose name="ase-meta-why"> Five-Whys Root-Cause Analysis </purpose>

<expand name="getopt" arg1="ase-meta-why" arg2="--depth|-d=5 --width|-w=1"> $ARGUMENTS </expand>

<objective> Apply the *Five-Whys* *root-cause analysis* technique to investigate the following problem:

<problem>Why <getopt-arguments/>?</problem>

For this, iteratively ask "why" to drill down from symptoms to the root-cause. This helps to identify the fundamental reason behind a problem rather than just addressing surface-level symptoms. </objective>

<flow>
  1. <step id="STEP 1: Restate Problem"> <if condition="<getopt-arguments/> is empty"> Only output the following <template/> and then immediately *STOP* processing the entire current skill: <template> ⧉ **ASE**: ✪ skill: **ase-meta-why**, ▶ ERROR: expected a `<fact>` argument </template> </if>

    State the problem statement.

    <template> <ase-tpl-bullet-signal/> **PROBLEM**: <problem/> </template> </step>
  2. <step id="STEP 2: Root-Cause Analysis">

    Find the root-cause of <problem/> by following this iteration cycle. Start with a <question/> set equal to the <problem/>.

    Determine the maximum chain length from <getopt-option-depth/>: set <depth/> to <getopt-option-depth/>; if <getopt-option-depth/> is non-numeric or less than or equal to 0, use the default 5 instead.

    Determine the maximum chain width from <getopt-option-width/>: set <width/> to <getopt-option-width/>; if <getopt-option-width/> is non-numeric or less than or equal to 0, use the default 1 instead.

    • <if condition="<width/> is less than or equal to 1">

      Walk a single causality chain (the classic Five-Whys):

      Start with <n>1</n> (set iteration counter to one).

      <while condition="<n/> is less than or equal to <depth/>">
      Ask <question/> and document the answer in <answer/> with the following template.
      Don't stop at symptoms; keep digging for systemic issues.
      Consider technical, domain-specific, process-related, or organizational causes.
      
      <template>
      <ase-tpl-bullet-secondary/> **WHY <n/>**: <answer/>
      </template>
      
      Then, for the next iteration, set <question/> now to be the last <answer/>.
      The magic is NOT in exactly <depth/> "Whys" -- you can <break/>
      the iteration when you have already reached the root-cause.
      Finally, set <n/> to <n/> + 1 (increment iteration counter).
      
      </while> </if>
    • <if condition="<width/> is greater than 1">

      Walk a widened causality chain: at each "why" level, surface up to <width/> candidate sub-causes, then commit to the single most significant one and descend into it (the chain stays single-rooted -- the extra candidates are not each drilled to their own root-cause). Their purpose is to guard against premature commitment to the wrong sub-cause: by enumerating the plausible alternatives at each level, the chosen descent is a justified selection rather than the first plausible answer, and the unchosen candidates remain on record as fallbacks to backtrack into (see STEP 3) should the chosen path fail validation.

      Remember the unchosen candidates of every level (keep them in <fallbacks/>, tagged by their level <n/>), so STEP 3 can backtrack into them.

      Start with <n>1</n> (set iteration counter to one).

      <while condition="<n/> is less than or equal to <depth/>">
      Ask <question/> and surface up to <width/> *distinct*,
      *non-overlapping* candidate sub-causes, each documented in <answer-k/>.
      Let <count/> be the number of candidates you actually surfaced
      (at least one, at most <width/>).
      Don't stop at symptoms; keep digging for systemic issues.
      Explore *different* candidates -- technical, domain-specific,
      process-related, or organizational causes -- and avoid restating
      the same cause in different words.
      
      Start with <k>1</k> (set candidate counter to one).
      <while condition="<k/> is less than or equal to <count/>">
          <template>
          <ase-tpl-bullet-secondary/> **WHY <n/>.<k/>**: <answer-k/>
          </template>
          Set <k/> to <k/> + 1 (increment candidate counter).
      </while>
      
      Then choose, among the <answer-k/>, the *most causally-significant*
      candidate -- the one most likely to lead to the true root-cause --
      set <chosen-k/> to its candidate index (the <k/> of the chosen
      <answer-k/>), and *justify* the choice in one line (state explicitly
      *why* it beats the other candidates, e.g. it alone also explains the
      timing, scope, or magnitude of the level's fact). A bare "most
      significant" is *not* sufficient; if no candidate clearly dominates,
      say so.
      
      <template>
      <ase-tpl-bullet-secondary/> **WHY <n/> → chosen <n/>.<chosen-k/>**: <justification/>
      </template>
      
      Record the remaining candidates as <fallbacks/> for level <n/>.
      Then, for the next iteration, set <question/> to the chosen candidate.
      You can <break/> the iteration when the chosen candidate has already
      reached its root-cause.
      Finally, set <n/> to <n/> + 1 (increment iteration counter).
      
      </while> </if>
    </step>
  3. <step id="STEP 3: Report Solution">

    Validate the root-cause by working backwards along the chosen causality chain: check, level by level, that each chosen sub-cause genuinely causes the fact above it (and that fixing the final root-cause would dissolve the whole chain up to the original <problem/>).

    When <width/> is greater than 1 and this backward validation fails at some level <m/> -- i.e. the chosen sub-cause does not adequately explain the fact above it -- backtrack: discard the chosen sub-cause (and every chosen sub-cause below it) from level <m/> downward, pick the next-best candidate from level <m/>'s <fallbacks/>, and resume the STEP 2 widened descent: set <n/> to <m/> (reset the iteration counter to the failed level), set <question/> to the picked candidate, and re-enter STEP 2's <while condition="<n/> is less than or equal to <depth/>"/> loop at that level -- so the original <depth/> budget is honored from <m/> downward. Repeat until a chain survives backward validation or level <m/>'s <fallbacks/> are exhausted (then report the strongest chain found and note that no candidate fully validated). This is the payoff of <width/> greater than 1: the enumerated alternatives let the analysis recover from a wrong turn instead of committing to a mis-rooted chain.

    Propose a solution that addresses and solves the validated root-cause. For the proposed solution, optionally directly propose corresponding source code changes.

    <template> <ase-tpl-bullet-signal/> **SOLUTION**: <solution/> </template> </step>
</flow>

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

Review software architecture, including package cohesion and inter-package coupling

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。

rse/ase602026年10月12日 更新

Discover additional, third-party components (libraries/frameworks) for the technology stack to provide needed functionality.

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。

rse/ase602026年10月12日 更新

Analyze the source code for problems in either the logic and semantics and its related control flow, performance and efficiency, or security.

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。

rse/ase602026年10月12日 更新

Craft Source Code: Use when user wants to "create", "add", or "craft" a new feature from scratch.

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。

rse/ase602026年10月12日 更新

Edit Source Code: Use when the user wants to "edit" the code base in one shot from a query or a bare analyzer issue id like "P1", fusing crafting, refactoring, and resolving with optional grilling, verification, looping, and Git worktree isolation.

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。

rse/ase602026年10月12日 更新

Explains code with WHAT, WHY, ANALOGY, DIAGRAM, CRUXES, and GOTCHAS. Use when you want to know how code works or when the user asks "how does this work?"

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。

rse/ase602026年10月12日 更新

rse のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する