Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Autonomous repository-wide audit-and-fix pipeline: health → review → locate/explain → fix → diff-verify → iterate until clean. Starts with a mandatory consent prompt (token-intensive); after consent runs hands-free. Trigger when the user wants ALL logic issues found and fixed — "fix...
.claude/skills/sickn33-logic-fix-all/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 95% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 32% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 115% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 31% | 0% |
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 13% | 0% |
Use this skill when you need autonomous repository-wide audit-and-fix pipeline: health → review → locate/explain → fix → diff-verify → iterate until clean. Starts with a mandatory consent prompt (token-intensive); after consent runs hands-free. Trigger when the user wants ALL logic issues found and fixed — "fix...
Use phase-gated lazy loading per ../_shared/common.md §13:
../_shared/common.md for language, scope routing, fix-all header fields, config fields, and loading budget; then read logic-fix-all-guide.md through the phase map and guide-phases-0-2-consent-scope-health.md through Phase 0.../_shared/logic-risks.md, ../_shared/semiformal-guide.md, ../_shared/semiformal-checklist.md, ../_shared/report-template.md, and the other skill guides on demand when that phase invokes their methodology.Step 0. Language + scope routing. Detect language per common.md §1. Default scope is the repo root; honor a user-named subpath or pasted snippet. For a pasted snippet, skip the consent prompt and run the fix pipeline directly. Read .logic-lens.yaml for ignore:, custom_risks, severity:, focus:, and fix_all.max_iterations.
Step 1. Consent + scope enumeration (guide Phase 0–1) — for repo/directory scope: mandatory consent prompt displaying scope / method / cost / iteration cap; on consent, enumerate runtime-affecting files (source / config / constraint / doc), exclude .git and build artifacts, classify by risk tier. For a pasted snippet: skip consent, enumerate the snippet's functions directly.
Step 2. Health pass (guide Phase 2) — apply logic-health methodology to map per-module Logic Scores and L-code patterns.
Step 3. Deep review (guide Phase 3) — apply logic-review per file to collect full Premises → Trace → Divergence findings.
Step 4. Conditional clarification (guide Phase 4–5) — apply logic-locate where concrete failures exist; apply logic-explain when a finding's path is unclear (call depth > 3, cross-module, or async).
Step 5. Fix queue + remedy (guide Phase 6) — sort by severity; write a paste-ready Remedy per finding; route cross-file contradictions to the correct edit target (code / constraint / config / doc).
Step 6. Apply + verify (guide Phase 7) — apply each fix, then apply logic-diff methodology comparing original vs. fixed code. Expected verdict: ⚠️ Conditionally Equivalent where the differing condition is exactly the bug scenario. Revert if verdict is ✅ Semantically Equivalent (fix had no effect) or shows new divergences outside the bug scenario (regression). Retry up to 3×.
Step 7. Iterate + report (guide Phase 8–9) — re-run health + review on modified files and their consumers; Criticals loop without cap; Warning/Suggestion rounds capped by fix_all.max_iterations with user-escalation prompt at the cap. Output the Fix Report.
Mode line in report: Logic Fix All (Chinese: 逻辑全修).
Fix-report additions (appended after the standard Summary; localize all labels):
## Scope
| Role (source/config/constraint/doc) | Files scanned | Tier H/M/L | Truncated? |
|-------------------------------------|---------------|------------|------------|
## Skill Invocations
logic-health: N · logic-review: N · logic-locate: N · logic-explain: N · logic-diff: N
## Iteration History
| Round | Severity class | New findings | Action |
## Fix Log
| # | File | Lines | Finding | Risk | Severity | Fix Applied (one-line edit or diff summary) | Status (resolved/unresolved/reverted) |
## Resolved by Clarification
[Findings the Phase-5 logic-explain pass revealed as false positives. Empty if none.]
## Unresolved Findings
[Include reason per entry: "conflicting constraints", "user stopped iteration at round N",
"hard iteration ceiling reached", "ambiguous spec", "unclear whether spec or consumer is wrong".
Empty if all resolved.]Report header fields (replace the standard single-line header per common.md §5):
**Logic Score (before):** XX/100
**Logic Score (after):** YY/100
**Findings fixed:** N (Critical: n1 · Warning: n2 · Suggestion: n3)
**Findings unresolved:** M| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→fail | 23,224 | 10,192 | -56% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,278 | 2,180 | -49% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 3,485 | 6,019 | +73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 635 | 2,263 | +256% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 29,025 | 6,026 | -79% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,756 | 2,146 | -55% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 11,720 | 17,922 | +53% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,281 | 4,455 | +95% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 8,922 | 4,795 | -46% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,419 | 1,972 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 8,804 | 2,843 | -68% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,224 | 1,617 | +32% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 9,303 | 2,664 | -71% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,293 | 1,572 | +22% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 21,224 | 5,403 | -75% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 964 | 2,073 | +115% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 6,743 | 4,251 | -37% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,056 | 1,876 | +78% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 7,323 | 1,779 | -76% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,165 | 1,525 | +31% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 12,415 | 4,588 | -63% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,914 | 1,855 | -3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 13,237 | 4,713 | -64% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,138 | 1,969 | -8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 11,006 | 4,417 | -60% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,726 | 1,953 | +13% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 7,530 | 2,797 | -63% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,184 | 1,691 | +43% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | 3,965 | 2,454 | -38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 718 | 1,655 | +131% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 7,922 | 2,554 | -68% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,264 | 1,617 | +28% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 7,428 | 2,299 | -69% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,131 | 1,519 | +34% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 7,018 | 3,300 | -53% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 977 | 1,676 | +72% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 8,359 | 3,409 | -59% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,345 | 1,809 | +34% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 6,684 | 3,252 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,056 | 1,628 | +54% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 3,308 | 5,371 | +62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 603 | 2,145 | +256% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 4,761 | 5,591 | +17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 709 | 2,276 | +221% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | pass→pass | 3,179 | 4,223 | +33% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 529 | 1,865 | +253% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 23 cases were attempted, and 22 counted toward the lift figure. The other 1 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +43 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.