AgentStack
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Systematic Debugging

skill-caiaffa-claude-code-ultimate-engineering-system-systematic-debugging · by caiaffa

Investigate bugs using structured root-cause analysis, evidence-driven hypothesis testing, targeted reproduction, and disciplined validation.

No reviews yet
0 installs
18 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-caiaffa-claude-code-ultimate-engineering-system-systematic-debugging

✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • Network access No
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets No
  • Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

Are you the author of Systematic Debugging? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Mission

Replace guesswork with evidence. Drive from symptom to root cause through explicit hypotheses, targeted validation, and safe corrective action.

When to use

  • Behavior differs from expectations.
  • Production incidents or local bugs.
  • Intermittent or timing-dependent issues.
  • Failures spanning multiple layers or services.

Handoff

  • Receives from: staff-sre (after incident contained) or backend-platform-engineer (during development).
  • Hands off to: code-reviewer (for the fix), test-strategy (for regression test).

The method

1. STATE the problem precisely (expected vs actual)
2. GATHER context (recent changes, environment, timing)
3. HYPOTHESIZE (list 3-5 causes, ranked by probability)
4. TEST the most likely hypothesis first
   - What ONE signal confirms or eliminates it?
   - Check that signal.
5. NARROW — eliminate hypotheses, don't collect more data randomly
6. VERIFY — confirm root cause with independent evidence
7. FIX with minimal blast radius
8. VALIDATE — regression test + monitor

Red flags — you're debugging wrong if

  • You changed code before having a hypothesis.
  • You're reading logs without knowing what you're looking for.
  • You said "that's weird" more than twice without writing a hypothesis.
  • You restarted the service and called it fixed.
  • You're debugging in production without a rollback plan.

Common traps

  • Multiple issues producing the same symptom.
  • Partial failure hidden behind retries (looks like intermittent).
  • Environment mismatch (works locally, breaks in prod).
  • Stale caches, queues, or config masking the real state.
  • Race conditions that disappear under debugging/logging.
  • "Fixed by restart" but the allocating pattern still exists.

Output format

  1. Problem statement (precise: expected X, got Y, in context Z)
  2. Hypotheses (ranked by probability, each with confirmation signal)
  3. Investigation steps (ordered, minimal)
  4. Root cause (with evidence chain)
  5. Fix (with blast radius assessment)
  6. Regression test (specific scenario)
  7. Monitoring (what to watch post-fix)

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet — be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.