Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior during spec-superflow execution, before proposing fixes. Invoked automatically when build-executor hits a blockage.
.claude/skills/hashgraph-online-bug-investigator/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 47% | 0% |
| case-19 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 143% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 87% | 0% |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 108% | 0% |
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 48% | 0% |
Core principle: Find root cause before attempting fixes. Symptom fixes are failure.
No fixes without root cause investigation first. If you haven't completed Phase 1, you cannot propose fixes.
Use for ANY technical issue: test failures, bugs, unexpected behavior, performance problems, build failures, integration issues. Especially when under time pressure, "one quick fix" seems obvious, you've already tried multiple fixes, or you don't fully understand the issue.
Don't skip because issue "seems simple" or you're "in a hurry" — systematic debugging is faster than thrashing.
Complete each phase before proceeding.
Scientific method: form a single hypothesis ("I think X is the root cause because Y"), test with the smallest possible change (one variable at a time), verify before continuing. If it didn't work, form a NEW hypothesis — don't add more fixes. When you don't know, say so and ask for help.
3+ failed fixes = architectural problem. Each fix revealing new problems elsewhere = wrong architecture.
After every failed fix, preserve its failure output in a physical file inside the change directory, then record the distinct attempt:
Before this command, every workflow path (including Quick/direct Hotfix/Tweak) must have a current, valid execution plan. If it does not, establish and confirm one with ssf execution recommend and ssf execution plan before recording the attempt; the debug command rejects a missing or stale plan.
bashssf debug attempt record <change-dir> \ --id <unique-attempt-id> \ --summary "<what was tried and why it failed>" \ --evidence <change-local-failure-log>
Use ssf debug attempt show <change-dir> --json to present the complete attempt ledger. Wave Review repair failures are separate evidence and never count as debugging attempts.
After at least three distinct evidence-backed attempts, stop and discuss the architectural decision with the user. Only after the user explicitly chooses may DP-5 be recorded:
bashssf debug escalate <change-dir> \ --decision <continue|abandon> \ --reason "<user-confirmed decision>" \ --confirm
Never write dp_5_* through raw ssf state set; those fields are guarded by the debug ledger. If the user chooses abandon, transition to abandoned only after the guarded DP-5 receipt is recorded.
"Quick fix, investigate later" / "Just try changing X" / "Skip the test, I'll verify manually" / "It's probably X, let me fix that" / "I don't fully understand but this might work" / "One more fix attempt" (after 2+) / Proposing solutions before tracing data flow.
All of these mean: STOP. Return to Phase 1. If 3+ fixes failed, question the architecture.
| Phase | Key Activities | Success Criteria | |-------|---------------|------------------| | 1. Root Cause | Read errors, reproduce, check changes, gather evidence | Understand WHAT and WHY | | 2. Pattern | Find working examples, compare | Identify differences | | 3. Hypothesis | Form theory, test minimally | Confirmed or new hypothesis | | 4. Implementation | Create test, fix, verify | Bug resolved, tests pass |
If truly environmental/timing-dependent/external: document what you investigated, implement appropriate handling (retry, timeout, error message), add monitoring. But 95% of "no root cause" cases are incomplete investigation.
End every user-facing phase report with this concise handoff. Only a successfully persisted closing state and abandoned are terminal.
<detected workflow stage>.<completed work>.<next workflow stage or skill>.<what must be true to enter it>.<detected workflow stage>.<blocking fact or missing evidence>.<stage that resumes after the blocker>.<the approval, artifact, validation, or fix required>.<detected workflow stage>.<work ready for the named decision>.<stage that follows approval>.<explicit user approval or recorded decision>.closing or abandoned.<persisted terminal outcome>.none.Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.