debug — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited debug (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Investigate the issue: $ARGUMENTS
Hard rule: do NOT write any fix until Phase 3 is reached and the user (or the evidence in Phase 2) has confirmed the root cause.
why-no-hook: skill workflow guidance; each step requires understanding the surrounding context (repo, task shape, prior state).
Gather, do not theorize. Save findings to .claude/state/research/YYYY-MM-DD-debug-<short-slug>.md.
PROJECT-ABC, numeric ID, or sentry.io URL), fetch the digest first via the sentry-issue skill: ~/.agents/skills/sentry-issue/scripts/sentry-issue.sh <id>. Full payloads land in /tmp/sentry-{issue,event}-<id>.json for deeper jq queries. (review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)git log -p --since='2 weeks ago' -- <suspect-paths> to surface recent changes that touched the code path. (review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)If the user already supplied a hypothesis, treat it as a candidate but still gather evidence to confirm or reject.
Before hypothesising, build a tight, red-capable feedback loop - one command (a failing test, a curl against a running server, a CLI invocation diffing output, a replayed trace) that you have already run at least once and that goes red on _this_ bug and green once fixed. Tighten it: faster, sharper signal, more deterministic (pin time, seed RNG). For a flaky bug, raise the reproduction rate until it's debuggable rather than chasing a clean repro. Then minimise - shrink to the smallest scenario that still goes red, cutting inputs, config, and steps one at a time. (review-time: loop construction is creative work, not pattern-checkable)
No red-capable command, no Phase 2 - jumping to a hypothesis before the loop exists is the exact failure this skill prevents. If you genuinely cannot build one (production-only, no local repro), say so explicitly, list what you tried, and ask the user for environment access or a captured artifact (HAR, log dump, core dump) before proceeding. (review-time: gate is a judgment about whether a real red-capable loop exists)
List 3-5 possible root causes ranked by evidence strength - generating several up front stops you anchoring on the first plausible idea. For each:
(review-time: see section note)(review-time: falsifiability judgment, not pattern-checkable)(review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)Pick the top candidate. If two are tied or the user has a strong prior, ask the user to choose. Do not proceed to Phase 3 on a guess.
(review-time: see section note)/improve-codebase-architecture. (review-time: see section note)[DEBUG-a4f2] when you add it, so cleanup is a single grep. (review-time: see section note)/verify-done (lint + typecheck + test + build). (review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)mr skill. PR body: link to the alert/log, root cause statement with evidence, and why this fix is correct. (review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)(review-time: see section note)~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.