Skip to content
Automation
Skill

/diagnosing-bugs

Diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Builds a red-capable feedback loop and runs it before hypothesising — complements static code review (which finds bugs by reading) by running actual repros. Use when the user says 'diagnose'/'debug this', or reports

From plugin
hermitd
8489 skills14 agents

Claude Code

$ npx -y skills add gtapps/hermitd --skill diagnosing-bugs --agent claude-code

SKILL.md

diagnosing-bugs.SKILL.md
name: diagnosing-bugs
description: "Diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Builds a red-capable feedback loop and runs it before hypothesising — complements static code review (which finds bugs by reading) by running actual repros. Use when the user says 'diagnose'/'debug this', or reports something broken/throwing/failing/slow."

Diagnosing Bugs

A discipline for hard bugs. Skip phases only when explicitly justified.

When exploring the codebase, consult `.hermit/compiled/` (hermit knowledge base — architecture decisions and codebase health assessments) to build a mental model of relevant modules before reading source. Check any ADRs in the area you're touching.

Diagnostic byproducts (failing-test output, stack traces, repro snapshots, instrumentation logs) go in `.hermit/raw/` — ephemeral inputs under analysis, not `.hermit/compiled/`. Reusable lessons from the diagnosis go to auto-memory.

Phase 1 — Build a feedback loop

**This is the skill.** Everything else is mechanical. If you have a **tight** pass/fail signal for the bug — one that goes red on _this_ bug — you will find the cause; bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume it. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.

Spend disproportionate effort here. **Be aggressive. Be creative. Refuse to give up.**

Ways to construct one — try them in roughly this order

1. **Failing test** at whatever seam reaches the bug — unit, integration, e2e. 2. **Curl / HTTP script** against a running dev server. 3. **CLI invocation** with a fixture input, diffing stdout against a known-good snapshot. 4. **Headless browser script** (Playwright / Puppeteer) — drives the UI, asserts on DOM/console/network. 5. **Replay a captured trace.** Save a real network request / payload / event log to disk (in `.hermit/raw/`); replay it through the code path in isolation. 6. **Throwaway harness.** Spin up a minimal subset of the system (one service, mocked deps) that exercises the bug code path with a single function call. 7. **Property / fuzz loop.** If the bug is "sometimes wrong output", run 1000 random inputs and look for the failure mode. 8. **Bisection harness.** If the bug appeared between two known states (commit, dataset, version), automate "boot at state X, check, repeat" so you can `git bisect run` it. 9. **Differential loop.** Run the same input through old-version vs new-version (or two configs) and diff outputs. 10. **HITL bash script.** Last resort. If a human must click, write a script that documents the exact steps and captures output so the loop is still structured.

Build the right feedback loop, and the bug is 90% fixed.

Tighten the loop

Treat the loop as a product. Once you have _a_ loop, **tighten** it:

  • Can I make it faster? (Cache setup, skip unrelated init, narrow the test scope.)
  • Can I make the signal sharper? (Assert on the specific symptom, not "didn't crash".)
  • Can I make it more deterministic? (Pin time, seed RNG, isolate filesystem, freeze network.)

A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than no loop; a 2-second deterministic one is tight — a debugging superpower.

Non-deterministic bugs

The goal is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**. Loop the trigger 100×, parallelise, add stress, narrow timing windows, inject sleeps. A 50%-flake bug is debuggable; 1% is not — keep raising the rate until it's debuggable.

When you genuinely cannot build a loop

Stop and say so explicitly. List what you tried. Ask the user for: (a) access to whatever environment reproduces it, (b) a captured artifact (HAR file, log dump, core dump, screen recording with timestamps), or (c) permission to add temporary production instrumentation. Do **not** proceed to hypothesise without a loop.

Completion criterion — a tight loop that goes red

Phase 1 is done when the loop is **tight** and **red-capable**: you can name **one command** — a script path, a test invocation, a curl — that you have **already run at least once** (paste the invocation and its output), and that is:

  • [ ] **Red-capable** — it drives the actual bug code path and asserts the **user's exact symptom**, so it can go red on this bug and green once fixed. Not "runs without erroring" — it must be able to _catch this specific bug_.
  • [ ] **Deterministic** — same verdict every run (flaky bugs: a pinned, high reproduction rate, per above).
  • [ ] **Fast** — seconds, not minutes.
  • [ ] **Agent-runnable** — you can run it unattended.

If you catch yourself reading code to build a theory before this command exists, **stop — jumping straight to a hypothesis is the exact failure this skill prevents.** No red-capable command, no Phase 2.

Phase 2 — Reproduce + minimise

Run the loop. Watch it go red — the bug appears.

Confirm:

  • [ ] The loop produces the failure mode the **user** described — not a different failure that happens to be nearby. Wrong bug = wrong fix.
  • [ ] The failure is reproducible across multiple runs (or, for non-deterministic bugs, reproducible at a high enough rate to debug against).
  • [ ] You have captured the exact symptom (error message, wrong output, slow timing) so later phases can verify the fix actually addresses it.

Minimise

Once it's red, shrink the repro to the **smallest scenario that still goes red**. Cut inputs, callers, config, data, and steps **one at a time**, re-running the loop after each cut — keep only what's load-bearing for the failure.

Why bother: a minimal repro shrinks the hypothesis space in Phase 3 (fewer moving parts left to suspect) and becomes the clean regression test in Phase 5.

Done when **every remaining element is load-bearing** — removing any one of them makes the loop go green.

Do not proceed until you have reproduced **and** minimised.

Phase 3 — Hypothesise

Generate **3–5 ranked hypotheses** before testing any of them. Single-hypothesis generation anchors on the first plausible idea.

Each hypothesis mus

Read more
@gtapps
Ships withhermitd

Run an always-on Claude Code agent on your own machine, for you or your team. Start and orchestrate sessions from chat in any project it can reach. Take over the same session in the Claude app or the CLI.

8489 skills14 agents
Get the whole plugin

Stars on GitHub

Momentum

stars in total
84
Star history of gtapps/claude-code-hermit on GitHub, a chart by star-history.com

Other skills on hermitd.

bump-core-req

bump-core-req

Updates the minimum core version requirement for a fleet plugin in all three canonical places: `required_core_version` and…

@gtapps@gtappsInstall Skill
commit

commit

Changelog and commit — lightweight motion for day-to-day plugin dev work in the monorepo. One commit per plugin scope; CHANGELOG…

@gtapps@gtappsInstall Skill
docs-drift

docs-drift

Documentation-drift audit for the plugin monorepo. Audits either each scoped plugin's unreleased changelog claims or its latest…

@gtapps@gtappsInstall Skill
downstream-impact

downstream-impact

Explain in plain language what a fix, feature, PR, or plan will actually change for downstream hermits and the operators chatting…

@gtapps@gtappsInstall Skill
fleet-release

fleet-release

Use this skill whenever the user wants to release, ship, prep, or cut versions for two or more plugins together on the current…

@gtapps@gtappsInstall Skill
pipeline-digest

pipeline-digest

Daily release-pipeline digest with a change gate — reports which plugins are pending release, whether main's CI is green, which…

@gtapps@gtappsInstall Skill

More skills from other plugins.

agent-builder

agent-builder

Load immediately after an Agent intent, before the first agent_builder_* call. Governs how you create, configure, test, and…

n8n12d209k
@n8n-io@n8n-ioInstall Skill
browser-use

browser-use

Direct browser control via CDP for web interaction: automation, scraping, testing, screenshots, and site/app work. Also covers…

@browser-use@browser-useInstall Skill
agent-browser

agent-browser

Browser automation CLI for AI agents. Use when the user needs to interact with websites, including navigating pages, filling…

@vercel-labs-2@vercel-labs-2Install Skill
add-anydoc

add-anydoc

Add local office-document-to-Markdown conversion to NanoClaw agent containers with the pinned Firecrawl AnyDoc CLI. Use when…

@nanocoai@nanocoaiInstall Skill

Questions about diagnosing-bugs.

Which coding agents can use diagnosing-bugs?
diagnosing-bugs installs in Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot, OpenCode and Windsurf with the skills CLI, using each agent's flag shown on this page. Flowy's auto-invocation, which fires a skill when your prompt matches, runs in Claude Code only.