Awesome-omni-skill debugging-workflow

Systematic debugging workflow with parallel agent exploration, root cause analysis, and fix verification. Adapted from feature-dev methodology for bug investigation.

install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skill
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skill "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/development/debugging-workflow" ~/.claude/skills/diegosouzapw-awesome-omni-skill-debugging-workflow && rm -rf "$T"
manifest: skills/development/debugging-workflow/SKILL.md
source content

Debugging Workflow Rules

Core Philosophy

Understand before you fix.

Debugging is not about quick patches - it's about:

  1. Deep understanding of the bug's manifestation
  2. Systematic tracing to root cause
  3. Strategic fix design considering side effects
  4. Thorough verification of the fix

6-Phase Debugging Workflow

PhaseNamePurposeAgents
1DiscoveryUnderstand bug symptoms-
2ExplorationTrace execution paths2-3 debug-explorer
3Root CauseIdentify true causeAnalysis synthesis
4StrategyDesign fix approach2-3 debug-strategist
5ImplementationApply the fixUser-approved
6VerificationConfirm fix works2-3 debug-verifier

Phase Details

Phase 1: Bug Discovery

Gather complete information about the bug:

BugReport:
  symptoms: What is happening?
  expected: What should happen?
  reproduction: Steps to reproduce
  frequency: Always / Sometimes / Rare
  context: Environment, version, user actions
  error_output: Error messages, stack traces, logs

Key Questions:

  • When did this start happening?
  • What changed recently?
  • Is it environment-specific?
  • Can it be reliably reproduced?

Phase 2: Codebase Exploration

Launch 2-3 debug-explorer agents in parallel with different focuses:

FocusInvestigation Target
Execution PathTrace the failing code path step by step
Data FlowTrack data transformations and mutations
DependenciesCheck related components and integrations

Serena MCP Integration:

# Symbol-level tracing
find_symbol: Locate relevant functions/classes
find_referencing_symbols: Find all callers
search_for_pattern: Search for error patterns

Phase 3: Root Cause Analysis

Synthesize exploration findings:

RootCauseAnalysis:
  immediate_cause: What directly triggers the error?
  underlying_cause: Why does this condition exist?
  contributing_factors: What else enables this bug?
  timeline: When was this introduced?

Common Root Cause Categories:

CategoryExamples
Logic ErrorWrong condition, off-by-one, null check missing
State ManagementRace condition, stale data, unexpected mutation
IntegrationAPI contract mismatch, version incompatibility
ResourceMemory leak, connection exhaustion, timeout
ConfigurationWrong settings, missing env vars, path issues

Phase 4: Fix Strategy Design

Launch 2-3 debug-strategist agents with different approaches:

ApproachStrategy
MinimalSmallest change to fix the symptom
ComprehensiveAddress root cause and prevent recurrence
DefensiveAdd guards, validation, error handling

Strategy Evaluation Criteria:

  • Risk of regression
  • Impact on related functionality
  • Code quality improvement
  • Testing feasibility

Phase 5: Implementation

Requires explicit user approval before proceeding.

Implementation checklist:

  • Apply the chosen fix strategy
  • Update related code if needed
  • Add defensive checks where appropriate
  • Document the fix rationale

Phase 6: Verification

Launch 2-3 debug-verifier agents with different focuses:

FocusVerification Target
DirectDoes the original bug no longer occur?
RegressionAre there any new issues introduced?
Edge CasesDoes it handle boundary conditions?

Verification Methods:

  • Manual reproduction attempt
  • Related test execution
  • Code review for side effects
  • Static analysis check

Confidence Scoring

All agents use confidence scoring (0-100):

ScoreMeaningAction
0-25SpeculationDo not report
26-50PossibleMention if relevant
51-79LikelyReport with caveats
80-100ConfidentReport as finding

Only report findings with confidence ≥ 80%


Integration with Serena MCP

TaskSerena Tool
Find function definition
find_symbol
Trace all callers
find_referencing_symbols
Search error patterns
search_for_pattern
Get file overview
get_symbols_overview
Read specific symbol
find_symbol
with
include_body=true

Output Templates

Exploration Report

## Exploration: [Focus Area]

### Entry Points Found
- `file.ts:123` - `functionName` - [description]

### Execution Path
1. [Step 1 description]
2. [Step 2 description]

### Key Components
| Component | File | Responsibility |
|-----------|------|----------------|

### Architecture Insights
- [Insight 1]
- [Insight 2]

### Critical Files to Review
1. `path/to/file.ts` - [reason]

Strategy Report

## Fix Strategy: [Approach Name]

### Proposed Change
[Description of the fix]

### Files to Modify
| File | Change Type | Description |
|------|-------------|-------------|

### Risk Assessment
- Regression risk: Low/Medium/High
- Impact scope: [affected areas]

### Implementation Steps
1. [Step 1]
2. [Step 2]

Verification Report

## Verification: [Focus Area]

### Test Results
| Test | Status | Notes |
|------|--------|-------|

### Issues Found
- Severity: Critical/Important
- Confidence: [score]%
- Location: `file:line`
- Description: [issue]
- Suggested Fix: [fix]

### Final Assessment
[Pass/Fail with reasoning]

Detailed templates:

Read("references/debug-patterns.md")