mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-05-06 21:46:40 +02:00
feat: new /brainstorm and /debug skills
/brainstorm: Socratic design exploration before planning. Context gathering, clarifying questions (smart-skip), related design discovery (keyword grep), premise challenge, forced alternatives, design doc artifact with lineage tracking (Supersedes: field). Writes to ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/. /debug: Systematic root-cause debugging. Iron Law: no fixes without root cause investigation. Pattern analysis, hypothesis testing with 3-strike escalation, structured DEBUG REPORT output. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
+230
@@ -0,0 +1,230 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: debug
|
||||
version: 1.0.0
|
||||
description: |
|
||||
Systematic debugging with root cause investigation. Four phases: investigate,
|
||||
analyze, hypothesize, implement. Iron Law: no fixes without root cause.
|
||||
allowed-tools:
|
||||
- Bash
|
||||
- Read
|
||||
- Write
|
||||
- Edit
|
||||
- Grep
|
||||
- Glob
|
||||
- AskUserQuestion
|
||||
---
|
||||
<!-- AUTO-GENERATED from SKILL.md.tmpl — do not edit directly -->
|
||||
<!-- Regenerate: bun run gen:skill-docs -->
|
||||
|
||||
## Preamble (run first)
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
_UPD=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-update-check 2>/dev/null || .claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-update-check 2>/dev/null || true)
|
||||
[ -n "$_UPD" ] && echo "$_UPD" || true
|
||||
mkdir -p ~/.gstack/sessions
|
||||
touch ~/.gstack/sessions/"$PPID"
|
||||
_SESSIONS=$(find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin -120 -type f 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
|
||||
find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin +120 -type f -delete 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
_CONTRIB=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get gstack_contributor 2>/dev/null || true)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If output shows `UPGRADE_AVAILABLE <old> <new>`: read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/gstack-upgrade/SKILL.md` and follow the "Inline upgrade flow" (auto-upgrade if configured, otherwise AskUserQuestion with 4 options, write snooze state if declined). If `JUST_UPGRADED <from> <to>`: tell user "Running gstack v{to} (just updated!)" and continue.
|
||||
|
||||
## AskUserQuestion Format
|
||||
|
||||
**ALWAYS follow this structure for every AskUserQuestion call:**
|
||||
1. Context: project name, current branch, what we're working on (1-2 sentences)
|
||||
2. The specific question or decision point
|
||||
3. `RECOMMENDATION: Choose [X] because [one-line reason]`
|
||||
4. Lettered options: `A) ... B) ... C) ...`
|
||||
|
||||
If `_SESSIONS` is 3 or more: the user is juggling multiple gstack sessions and context-switching heavily. **ELI16 mode** — they may not remember what this conversation is about. Every AskUserQuestion MUST re-ground them: state the project, the branch, the current plan/task, then the specific problem, THEN the recommendation and options. Be extra clear and self-contained — assume they haven't looked at this window in 20 minutes.
|
||||
|
||||
Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseline.
|
||||
|
||||
## Contributor Mode
|
||||
|
||||
If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
|
||||
|
||||
**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
|
||||
**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
|
||||
|
||||
**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
# {Title}
|
||||
|
||||
Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
|
||||
|
||||
**What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
|
||||
**What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
|
||||
**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
|
||||
|
||||
## Steps to reproduce
|
||||
1. {step}
|
||||
|
||||
## Raw output
|
||||
(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
|
||||
|
||||
**Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
|
||||
|
||||
Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
|
||||
|
||||
## Completion Status Protocol
|
||||
|
||||
When completing a skill workflow, report status using one of:
|
||||
- **DONE** — All steps completed successfully. Evidence provided for each claim.
|
||||
- **DONE_WITH_CONCERNS** — Completed, but with issues the user should know about. List each concern.
|
||||
- **BLOCKED** — Cannot proceed. State what is blocking and what was tried.
|
||||
- **NEEDS_CONTEXT** — Missing information required to continue. State exactly what you need.
|
||||
|
||||
### Escalation
|
||||
|
||||
It is always OK to stop and say "this is too hard for me" or "I'm not confident in this result."
|
||||
|
||||
Bad work is worse than no work. You will not be penalized for escalating.
|
||||
- If you have attempted a task 3 times without success, STOP and escalate.
|
||||
- If you are uncertain about a security-sensitive change, STOP and escalate.
|
||||
- If the scope of work exceeds what you can verify, STOP and escalate.
|
||||
|
||||
Escalation format:
|
||||
```
|
||||
STATUS: BLOCKED | NEEDS_CONTEXT
|
||||
REASON: [1-2 sentences]
|
||||
ATTEMPTED: [what you tried]
|
||||
RECOMMENDATION: [what the user should do next]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
# Systematic Debugging
|
||||
|
||||
## Iron Law
|
||||
|
||||
**NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST.**
|
||||
|
||||
Fixing symptoms creates whack-a-mole debugging. Every fix that doesn't address root cause makes the next bug harder to find. Find the root cause, then fix it.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: Root Cause Investigation
|
||||
|
||||
Gather context before forming any hypothesis.
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Collect symptoms:** Read the error messages, stack traces, and reproduction steps. If the user hasn't provided enough context, ask ONE question at a time via AskUserQuestion.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Read the code:** Trace the code path from the symptom back to potential causes. Use Grep to find all references, Read to understand the logic.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Check recent changes:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
git log --oneline -20 -- <affected-files>
|
||||
```
|
||||
Was this working before? What changed? A regression means the root cause is in the diff.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Reproduce:** Can you trigger the bug deterministically? If not, gather more evidence before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
Output: **"Root cause hypothesis: ..."** — a specific, testable claim about what is wrong and why.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Pattern Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
Check if this bug matches a known pattern:
|
||||
|
||||
| Pattern | Signature | Where to look |
|
||||
|---------|-----------|---------------|
|
||||
| Race condition | Intermittent, timing-dependent | Concurrent access to shared state |
|
||||
| Nil/null propagation | NoMethodError, TypeError | Missing guards on optional values |
|
||||
| State corruption | Inconsistent data, partial updates | Transactions, callbacks, hooks |
|
||||
| Integration failure | Timeout, unexpected response | External API calls, service boundaries |
|
||||
| Configuration drift | Works locally, fails in staging/prod | Env vars, feature flags, DB state |
|
||||
| Stale cache | Shows old data, fixes on cache clear | Redis, CDN, browser cache, Turbo |
|
||||
|
||||
Also check:
|
||||
- `TODOS.md` for related known issues
|
||||
- `git log` for prior fixes in the same area — **recurring bugs in the same files are an architectural smell**, not a coincidence
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3: Hypothesis Testing
|
||||
|
||||
Before writing ANY fix, verify your hypothesis.
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Confirm the hypothesis:** Add a temporary log statement, assertion, or debug output at the suspected root cause. Run the reproduction. Does the evidence match?
|
||||
|
||||
2. **If the hypothesis is wrong:** Return to Phase 1. Gather more evidence. Do not guess.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **3-strike rule:** If 3 hypotheses fail, **STOP**. Use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
```
|
||||
3 hypotheses tested, none match. This may be an architectural issue
|
||||
rather than a simple bug.
|
||||
|
||||
A) Continue investigating — I have a new hypothesis: [describe]
|
||||
B) Escalate for human review — this needs someone who knows the system
|
||||
C) Add logging and wait — instrument the area and catch it next time
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Red flags** — if you see any of these, slow down:
|
||||
- "Quick fix for now" — there is no "for now." Fix it right or escalate.
|
||||
- Proposing a fix before tracing data flow — you're guessing.
|
||||
- Each fix reveals a new problem elsewhere — wrong layer, not wrong code.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4: Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Once root cause is confirmed:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Fix the root cause, not the symptom.** The smallest change that eliminates the actual problem.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Minimal diff:** Fewest files touched, fewest lines changed. Resist the urge to refactor adjacent code.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Write a regression test** that:
|
||||
- **Fails** without the fix (proves the test is meaningful)
|
||||
- **Passes** with the fix (proves the fix works)
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Run the full test suite.** Paste the output. No regressions allowed.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **If the fix touches >5 files:** Use AskUserQuestion to flag the blast radius:
|
||||
```
|
||||
This fix touches N files. That's a large blast radius for a bug fix.
|
||||
A) Proceed — the root cause genuinely spans these files
|
||||
B) Split — fix the critical path now, defer the rest
|
||||
C) Rethink — maybe there's a more targeted approach
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 5: Verification & Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Fresh verification:** Reproduce the original bug scenario and confirm it's fixed. This is not optional.
|
||||
|
||||
Run the test suite and paste the output.
|
||||
|
||||
Output a structured debug report:
|
||||
```
|
||||
DEBUG REPORT
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
Symptom: [what the user observed]
|
||||
Root cause: [what was actually wrong]
|
||||
Fix: [what was changed, with file:line references]
|
||||
Evidence: [test output, reproduction attempt showing fix works]
|
||||
Regression test: [file:line of the new test]
|
||||
Related: [TODOS.md items, prior bugs in same area, architectural notes]
|
||||
Status: DONE | DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | BLOCKED
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Important Rules
|
||||
|
||||
- **3+ failed fix attempts → STOP and question the architecture.** Wrong architecture, not failed hypothesis.
|
||||
- **Never apply a fix you cannot verify.** If you can't reproduce and confirm, don't ship it.
|
||||
- **Never say "this should fix it."** Verify and prove it. Run the tests.
|
||||
- **If fix touches >5 files → AskUserQuestion** about blast radius before proceeding.
|
||||
- **Completion status:**
|
||||
- DONE — root cause found, fix applied, regression test written, all tests pass
|
||||
- DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — fixed but cannot fully verify (e.g., intermittent bug, requires staging)
|
||||
- BLOCKED — root cause unclear after investigation, escalated
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,148 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: debug
|
||||
version: 1.0.0
|
||||
description: |
|
||||
Systematic debugging with root cause investigation. Four phases: investigate,
|
||||
analyze, hypothesize, implement. Iron Law: no fixes without root cause.
|
||||
allowed-tools:
|
||||
- Bash
|
||||
- Read
|
||||
- Write
|
||||
- Edit
|
||||
- Grep
|
||||
- Glob
|
||||
- AskUserQuestion
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
{{PREAMBLE}}
|
||||
|
||||
# Systematic Debugging
|
||||
|
||||
## Iron Law
|
||||
|
||||
**NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST.**
|
||||
|
||||
Fixing symptoms creates whack-a-mole debugging. Every fix that doesn't address root cause makes the next bug harder to find. Find the root cause, then fix it.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: Root Cause Investigation
|
||||
|
||||
Gather context before forming any hypothesis.
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Collect symptoms:** Read the error messages, stack traces, and reproduction steps. If the user hasn't provided enough context, ask ONE question at a time via AskUserQuestion.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Read the code:** Trace the code path from the symptom back to potential causes. Use Grep to find all references, Read to understand the logic.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Check recent changes:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
git log --oneline -20 -- <affected-files>
|
||||
```
|
||||
Was this working before? What changed? A regression means the root cause is in the diff.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Reproduce:** Can you trigger the bug deterministically? If not, gather more evidence before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
Output: **"Root cause hypothesis: ..."** — a specific, testable claim about what is wrong and why.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Pattern Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
Check if this bug matches a known pattern:
|
||||
|
||||
| Pattern | Signature | Where to look |
|
||||
|---------|-----------|---------------|
|
||||
| Race condition | Intermittent, timing-dependent | Concurrent access to shared state |
|
||||
| Nil/null propagation | NoMethodError, TypeError | Missing guards on optional values |
|
||||
| State corruption | Inconsistent data, partial updates | Transactions, callbacks, hooks |
|
||||
| Integration failure | Timeout, unexpected response | External API calls, service boundaries |
|
||||
| Configuration drift | Works locally, fails in staging/prod | Env vars, feature flags, DB state |
|
||||
| Stale cache | Shows old data, fixes on cache clear | Redis, CDN, browser cache, Turbo |
|
||||
|
||||
Also check:
|
||||
- `TODOS.md` for related known issues
|
||||
- `git log` for prior fixes in the same area — **recurring bugs in the same files are an architectural smell**, not a coincidence
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3: Hypothesis Testing
|
||||
|
||||
Before writing ANY fix, verify your hypothesis.
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Confirm the hypothesis:** Add a temporary log statement, assertion, or debug output at the suspected root cause. Run the reproduction. Does the evidence match?
|
||||
|
||||
2. **If the hypothesis is wrong:** Return to Phase 1. Gather more evidence. Do not guess.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **3-strike rule:** If 3 hypotheses fail, **STOP**. Use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
```
|
||||
3 hypotheses tested, none match. This may be an architectural issue
|
||||
rather than a simple bug.
|
||||
|
||||
A) Continue investigating — I have a new hypothesis: [describe]
|
||||
B) Escalate for human review — this needs someone who knows the system
|
||||
C) Add logging and wait — instrument the area and catch it next time
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Red flags** — if you see any of these, slow down:
|
||||
- "Quick fix for now" — there is no "for now." Fix it right or escalate.
|
||||
- Proposing a fix before tracing data flow — you're guessing.
|
||||
- Each fix reveals a new problem elsewhere — wrong layer, not wrong code.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4: Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Once root cause is confirmed:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Fix the root cause, not the symptom.** The smallest change that eliminates the actual problem.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Minimal diff:** Fewest files touched, fewest lines changed. Resist the urge to refactor adjacent code.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Write a regression test** that:
|
||||
- **Fails** without the fix (proves the test is meaningful)
|
||||
- **Passes** with the fix (proves the fix works)
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Run the full test suite.** Paste the output. No regressions allowed.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **If the fix touches >5 files:** Use AskUserQuestion to flag the blast radius:
|
||||
```
|
||||
This fix touches N files. That's a large blast radius for a bug fix.
|
||||
A) Proceed — the root cause genuinely spans these files
|
||||
B) Split — fix the critical path now, defer the rest
|
||||
C) Rethink — maybe there's a more targeted approach
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 5: Verification & Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Fresh verification:** Reproduce the original bug scenario and confirm it's fixed. This is not optional.
|
||||
|
||||
Run the test suite and paste the output.
|
||||
|
||||
Output a structured debug report:
|
||||
```
|
||||
DEBUG REPORT
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
Symptom: [what the user observed]
|
||||
Root cause: [what was actually wrong]
|
||||
Fix: [what was changed, with file:line references]
|
||||
Evidence: [test output, reproduction attempt showing fix works]
|
||||
Regression test: [file:line of the new test]
|
||||
Related: [TODOS.md items, prior bugs in same area, architectural notes]
|
||||
Status: DONE | DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | BLOCKED
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Important Rules
|
||||
|
||||
- **3+ failed fix attempts → STOP and question the architecture.** Wrong architecture, not failed hypothesis.
|
||||
- **Never apply a fix you cannot verify.** If you can't reproduce and confirm, don't ship it.
|
||||
- **Never say "this should fix it."** Verify and prove it. Run the tests.
|
||||
- **If fix touches >5 files → AskUserQuestion** about blast radius before proceeding.
|
||||
- **Completion status:**
|
||||
- DONE — root cause found, fix applied, regression test written, all tests pass
|
||||
- DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — fixed but cannot fully verify (e.g., intermittent bug, requires staging)
|
||||
- BLOCKED — root cause unclear after investigation, escalated
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user