Skip to content
Development
Skill

/bug-fix-protocol

Use when fixing a reported bug end to end. Enforces a disciplined sequence — reproduce, write a failing test, fix minimally, verify, prevent recurrence — and blocks the common failure mode of patching symptoms.

From plugin
claude-skills-collection
27137 skills
Install
$ npx -y skills add nimadorostkar/Claude-Skills-collection --skill bug-fix-protocol --agent claude-code

How it fires

How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.

  • Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
  • You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
  • Slash command/bug-fix-protocol

Context preview

The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.

Use when fixing a reported bug end to end. Enforces a disciplined sequence — reproduce, write a failing test, fix minimally, verify, prevent recurrence — and blocks the common failure mode of patching symptoms.

SKILL.md

bug-fix-protocol.SKILL.md
name: bug-fix-protocol
description: Use when fixing a reported bug end to end. Enforces a disciplined sequence — reproduce, write a failing test, fix minimally, verify, prevent recurrence — and blocks the common failure mode of patching symptoms.
metadata:
  category: development
  version: 1.0.0
  tags: [bugfix, testing, root-cause, process]

Bug Fix Protocol

Purpose

Turn a bug report into a merged fix without introducing a second bug. The protocol is deliberately rigid: it exists to prevent the two most common failures — fixing the symptom, and fixing the cause without proving it.

When to Use

  • Any reported defect with a reproducible symptom.
  • A regression discovered in CI or production.
  • A hotfix under time pressure — especially then.

Capabilities

  • Reproduction and minimization.
  • Root-cause isolation (see the `debugging` skill for the search method).
  • Minimal, targeted fixes with regression tests.
  • Blast-radius assessment for the same class of defect elsewhere.

Inputs

  • The bug report: expected behavior, observed behavior, environment, steps.
  • Access to logs, traces, or a failing build.
  • The severity and whether a rollback is available.

Outputs

  • A failing test that captures the bug.
  • The smallest change that makes it pass.
  • A note on where else this defect class could occur.

Workflow

1. **Reproduce before reading code.** If you cannot reproduce it, the report is incomplete — go back for the missing detail. Do not guess. 2. **Write the failing test.** In the real test suite, at the right level. It must fail for the right reason, with a clear message. 3. **Find the cause.** Not the line where it crashed — the decision that made the crash possible. 4. **Fix minimally.** Change only what is required. Refactoring belongs in a separate commit. 5. **Verify.** New test passes; full suite passes; reproduce the original scenario manually and confirm it is gone. 6. **Look for siblings.** Grep for the same pattern elsewhere. A bug found once is usually present three times. 7. **Close the loop.** State in the PR: what broke, why, what changed, and what now prevents it.

Best Practices

  • If you cannot write a test that fails before the fix, you have not understood the bug.
  • Under time pressure, mitigate first (rollback, feature flag, rate limit), then fix properly. Do not ship a rushed fix to production and call it done.
  • Never "fix" a flaky test by retrying it. Flakiness is a real defect in the test or the code.
  • Do not widen a `try/except` to make an error go away. That hides the next bug too.
  • Record the root cause in the issue, not just the fix. The next person will search for the symptom.

Examples

**PR description that closes the loop:**

## What broke
Users on annual plans were charged twice when upgrading mid-cycle.

## Why
`ProrationCalculator` issued the invoice before checking whether the
subscription already had a pending invoice for the same period. Under
concurrent upgrade requests, both passed the check.

## Fix
Added a unique constraint on (subscription_id, period_start) and made
invoice creation idempotent on that key. The second request now returns
the existing invoice rather than creating one.

## Prevention
Regression test `test_concurrent_upgrade_creates_one_invoice` runs two
upgrades in parallel and asserts a single invoice. Audited the other
three call sites of `issue_invoice` — `RenewalJob` had the same gap and
is fixed in the same commit.

Notes

  • Idempotency keys on write endpoints prevent an entire class of duplicate-side-effect bugs. If the bug was a duplicate charge, message, or record, this is usually the real fix.
  • If a bug is reported and cannot be reproduced after honest effort, close it as such and say what you tried. Leaving it open forever is not diligence.
Read more
Ships withclaude-skills-collection

A curated library of 137 production-grade skills for Claude and other AI coding agents. Every skill follows one structure, speaks with one voice, and earns its place by changing what the agent does.

Get the whole plugin
Stats
27
Stars
3
Forks
Maintained
Maintenance
Python
Language
MIT
License
1mo ago
Last commit
2mo ago
Created

Repo: nimadorostkar/Claude-Skills-collection

Other skills on claude-skills-collection.