debugging-log-analyser-455b7e — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited debugging-log-analyser-455b7e (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.
Parses raw error logs, stack traces, and crash reports into a structured diagnosis with probable root cause, affected code path, and specific next steps — no hand-waving.
Second in the incident-response spine: `/slo-error-budget` (frame) → `debugging-log-analyser` → `/incident-postmortem` → `/oncall-runbook`. It takes the raw symptoms of a live incident and hands /incident-postmortem the root-cause diagnosis and the fix — so the postmortem builds on the diagnosis instead of re-deriving it. Shared terms (root cause vs contributing factors, mitigation vs resolution) are defined once in docs/craft/incident-response.md.
Debugging fails when it jumps to a fix before the evidence supports it. Phase 2 is the skill — a diagnosis is only as good as its confidence, and false certainty sends responders down the wrong path at the worst time.
actual failing frame (not the framework noise), and note what the logs do and don't show. Redact secrets in anything you quote back. Done when: the failing frame is identified, and the evidence gap (what the logs can't tell you) is stated rather than filled with a guess.
cause and its confidence (confirmed / likely / uncertain), plus the alternative if it's not certain. A diagnosis without a confidence level is a guess wearing a lab coat. Done when: the root cause carries a confidence label and, if not confirmed, the next observation that would confirm or refute it.
for the root cause — and, distinctly, the fastest mitigation to stop user impact now (rollback, flag-off), because stopping the bleeding and fixing the wound are different moves at different urgencies. Done when: there's a specific fix for the root cause AND an immediate mitigation, and they're not conflated.
/incident-postmortem can build the timeline and contributing factors from evidence, not memory. Done when: the postmortem could start from this output without re-diagnosing.
Ask for these if not provided:
Error type: [Runtime exception / Build error / Config error / Network error / Memory error / Unknown] Severity: [Fatal / Critical / Warning / Informational] Recurrence pattern: [One-off / Intermittent / Consistent / On-startup / Under load]
Walk the stack frame by frame, starting from the origin:
For each significant frame, note whether it is:
Probable root cause: [1–2 sentence plain English statement] Confidence: [High / Medium / Low — and why] Alternative causes to rule out: [If confidence is not high]
Entry point: [Where the triggering call began] Key function(s) involved: [Specific functions/methods named in the trace] Data that triggered it: [If inferable from the log — e.g. null value, malformed JSON]
Provide a concrete, code-level suggestion:
If the root cause is uncertain, provide an ordered list of 3–5 specific debugging actions:
strace, pprof, --verbose, add logging at X]One or two concrete things that would prevent this class of error recurring:
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.