Skills systematic-debugging
📦

systematic-debugging

Content revision r2 Medium Risk ⚙️ External commands📁 Filesystem access🔑 Env variables

Debug Software with Evidence

Guessing at fixes wastes time and can create regressions. This skill guides evidence gathering, root-cause tracing, focused hypothesis tests, and verified implementation.

Supports: Claude Codex Code(CC)
📊 70 Adequate

Install with my Agent

Copy this request to your Agent. It includes the canonical Skill page and manifest.

Agent request
Review the Skillstore skill "systematic-debugging" from https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.

Your Agent should still show its plan and request any confirmation required by the security policy.

Agent-readable resources

Use these links when an AI agent, crawler, or script needs clean context instead of reading the full page.

Markdown detail GET /skills/davila7-systematic-debugging.md Signed manifest GET /api/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging/manifest Signed lockfile GET /api/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging/lockfile

Test it

Using "systematic-debugging". A payment test sometimes remains pending after an arbitrary delay.

Expected outcome:

  • Reproduction: Run the test repeatedly and record completion events and state transitions.
  • Hypothesis: The assertion races the asynchronous status update.
  • Minimal test: Wait for the completed state instead of waiting for a fixed duration.
  • Verification: Repeat the test under load and run the related suite.

Using "systematic-debugging". A repository appears in the wrong directory during tests.

Expected outcome:

  • Immediate cause: Repository initialization received an empty working directory.
  • Trace: Follow the directory value through each caller to the test setup.
  • Root cause: Setup state was read before initialization completed.
  • Fix and verify: Guard early access, validate each boundary, and rerun pollution checks.

Security Audit

Medium Risk
v9 • 7/23/2026 Open versioned report

All 38 static findings are false positives caused by template literals, Markdown, ordinary prose, or bounded diagnostic examples. The reviewed files show no malicious command execution, reconnaissance, hidden-file access, or prompt injection. However, root-cause-tracing.md recommends logging environment variables without redaction, which could expose secrets in diagnostic output.

11
Files scanned
1,262
Lines analyzed
0
Review items
0
False positives ignored

Confirmed security concerns (1)

Medium
root-cause-tracing.md:160
Broad Environment Logging Can Expose Secrets
The tracing guide recommends logging environment variables without limiting names or redacting values, which can leak credentials into diagnostic output.
The prose directly recommends including environment variables in logs and provides no allowlist or redaction requirement.

Risk Factors

⚙️ External commands (20)
condition-based-waiting-example.ts:36 condition-based-waiting-example.ts:79 condition-based-waiting-example.ts:128 condition-based-waiting.md:74-80 defense-in-depth.md:31-34 defense-in-depth.md:34-38 defense-in-depth.md:64-70 find-polluter.sh:22 find-polluter.sh:23 find-polluter.sh:30 SKILL.md:18-20 SKILL.md:20-77 SKILL.md:77-87 SKILL.md:87-90 SKILL.md:90-106 SKILL.md:106-114 SKILL.md:114-179 SKILL.md:179-282 SKILL.md:282-283 SKILL.md:283-284
📁 Filesystem access (3)
condition-based-waiting.md:55 CREATION-LOG.md:7 find-polluter.sh:42
🔑 Env variables (4)
defense-in-depth.md:58 defense-in-depth.md:58 root-cause-tracing.md:77 root-cause-tracing.md:77
Audited by: codex View Audit History →
Share & cite this report

Share the versioned assessment report, neutral badge, embed card, and citations. Skillstore reports evidence without deciding whether this Skill is safe.

Open versioned report
Security Assessment

Copy report link

https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging/audits/9?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_report

Markdown badge

[![Skillstore security assessment](https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging/security.svg)](https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging?utm_source=security_passport_badge)

HTML badge

<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>

Embed card

<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>
Academic citations (APA · BibTeX · CFF)

APA citation

davila7. (2026). systematic-debugging security audit report (audit version 9) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging/audits/9

BibTeX citation

@techreport{davila7-davila7-systematic-debugging-2026, author = {davila7}, title = {systematic-debugging security audit report (audit version 9)}, institution = {Skillstore}, year = {2026}, number = {9}, url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging/audits/9}, note = {Author version unspecified} }

CITATION.cff

cff-version: 1.2.0 message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report." title: "systematic-debugging security audit report (audit version 9)" version: "unspecified" type: report authors: - name: "davila7" date-released: "2026-07-23" url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-systematic-debugging/audits/9" identifiers: - type: other value: "skillstore:davila7-systematic-debugging:audit:9" description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"

Compare variants

12 installable variants

Each author remains a separate installable skill. The recommended variant is ranked by Skillstore evidence.

Why this variant is first

Highest Skillstore Score
Asmayaseen Recommended

asmayaseen-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 81
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 20
Updated

2026-08-21

ChrisWiles

chriswiles-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 79
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 11
Updated

2026-08-21

Doyajin174

doyajin174-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 79
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 9
Updated

2026-08-21

DMJGilbert

dmjgilbert-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 79
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 9
Updated

2026-08-21

CodingCossack

codingcossack-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 74
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 59
Updated

2026-08-21

ZhanlinCui

zhanlincui-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 71
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 90
Updated

2026-08-21

obra

obra-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 71
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 14
Updated

2026-08-21

Cycleaddict

cycleaddict-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 71
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 5
Updated

2026-08-21

davila7 Current

davila7-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 70
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 5
Updated

2026-08-21

DYAI2025

dyai2025-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 70
Evidence Confidence Medium
Skillstore usage 45
Updated

2026-08-21

Cygnusfear

cygnusfear-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 50
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 5
Updated

2026-08-21

sickn33

sickn33-systematic-debugging

Skillstore Score 38
Evidence Confidence Medium
Skillstore usage 12
Updated

2026-08-21

Skillstore Score

Why this score Evidence Confidence: High
55
Architecture
85
Maintainability
87
Content
71
Community
83
Spec Compliance

What You Can Build

Resolve a failing test

Reproduce a failure, separate symptoms from causes, test one hypothesis, and verify the complete test suite.

Trace an integration defect

Instrument component boundaries and locate where data or configuration stops matching expectations.

Review repeated fix attempts

Assess failed changes, identify hidden coupling, and decide whether the architecture needs discussion.

Try These Prompts

Investigate a failing test 
Investigate this failing test systematically: [failure]. Reproduce it, gather evidence, identify the root cause, then propose one minimal fix.
Trace an unexpected value 
Trace [unexpected value] backward from [failure location]. Identify each caller, the value passed, and the earliest incorrect assignment.
Diagnose a component boundary 
Diagnose [system failure] across [components]. Define safe instrumentation at each boundary, compare expected and observed data, and isolate the failing component.
Reassess failed fixes 
Review these failed fixes: [attempts]. Extract new evidence, challenge the current architecture, and define the next single hypothesis with verification criteria.

Best Practices

  • Share complete errors, stack traces, reproduction steps, and relevant recent changes.
  • State one falsifiable hypothesis and define evidence that would confirm or reject it.
  • Create a failing test before implementation and run related tests after the fix.

Avoid

  • Requesting a fix before reproducing the failure or gathering evidence.
  • Changing several variables at once and losing the ability to isolate causality.
  • Treating a longer timeout, retry, or symptom patch as proof of root cause.

Frequently Asked Questions

What problems does this skill cover?
It covers bugs, test failures, build failures, performance problems, integration defects, and other unexpected software behavior.
Does the skill execute commands automatically?
The guidance may suggest local diagnostics and includes a test-bisection script. Execution depends on agent permissions and user approval.
Which languages and frameworks are supported?
The process is language-neutral. Examples use TypeScript, Bash, Git, and npm, so other environments require adaptation.
What happens when the failure is not reproducible?
Gather more evidence, add focused instrumentation, record environmental differences, and avoid speculative fixes until a testable hypothesis exists.
Can arbitrary timeouts ever be appropriate?
Yes. Use them only for known timing behavior, after waiting for the triggering condition, with a clear explanation.
Does this replace testing or code review?
No. It organizes investigation and verification, while tests, review, monitoring, and human judgment remain necessary.

Developer Details

Author

davila7

License

MIT

Skillstore revision

r2

Version notice

The author did not declare a version.

Repository

https://github.com/davila7/claude-code-templates/tree/main/cli-tool/components/skills/development/systematic-debugging

Ref

c43861a65bb95efcae259cd161c9d6f4dc7eec6f

Maintenance freshness

7/24/2026

Usage

4 downloads · 258 views

File structure

📄 condition-based-waiting-example.ts

📄 condition-based-waiting.md

📄 CREATION-LOG.md

📄 defense-in-depth.md

📄 find-polluter.sh

📄 root-cause-tracing.md

📄 SKILL.md

📄 test-academic.md

📄 test-pressure-1.md

📄 test-pressure-2.md

📄 test-pressure-3.md