Skills bug-review
Bug hunting with evidence trails: find defects, document them, and verify fixes
git clone https://github.com/openclaw/skills
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/openclaw/skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/athola/nm-pensive-bug-review" ~/.claude/skills/openclaw-skills-bug-review && rm -rf "$T"
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/openclaw/skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.openclaw/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/athola/nm-pensive-bug-review" ~/.openclaw/skills/openclaw-skills-bug-review && rm -rf "$T"
skills/athola/nm-pensive-bug-review/SKILL.mdNight Market Skill — ported from claude-night-market/pensive. For the full experience with agents, hooks, and commands, install the Claude Code plugin.
Table of Contents
- Quick Start
- When to Use
- Required TodoWrite Items
- Progressive Loading
- Workflow
- Step 1: Detect Languages (
)bug-review:language-detected - Step 2: Plan Reproduction (
)bug-review:repro-plan - Step 3: Document Defects (
)bug-review:defects-documented - Step 4: Prepare Fixes (
)bug-review:fixes-prepared - Step 5: Verification Plan (
)bug-review:verification-plan - Defect Classification (Condensed)
- Output Format
- Summary
- Defects Found
- [D1] file.rs:142 - Title
- Proposed Fixes
- Fix for D1
- Test Updates
- Evidence
- Best Practices
- Exit Criteria
Bug Review Workflow
Systematic bug identification and fixing with language-specific expertise.
Quick Start
/bug-review
Verification: Run the command with
--help flag to verify availability.
When To Use
- Reviewing code for potential bugs
- After receiving bug reports
- Before major releases
- During security audits
- Investigating production issues
When NOT To Use
- Test coverage audit - use test-review instead
Required TodoWrite Items
bug-review:language-detectedbug-review:repro-planbug-review:defects-documentedbug-review:fixes-preparedbug-review:verification-plan
Progressive Loading
Load additional context as needed:
- Language Detection:
- Manifest heuristics, expertise framing, version constraints@include modules/language-detection.md - Defect Documentation:
- Severity classification, root cause analysis, static analyzers@include modules/defect-documentation.md - Fix Preparation:
- Minimal patches, idiomatic patterns, test coverage@include modules/fix-preparation.md
Workflow
Step 1: Detect Languages (bug-review:language-detected
)
bug-review:language-detectedIdentify dominant languages using manifest files (Cargo.toml → Rust, package.json → Node, etc.).
State expertise persona appropriate for the language ecosystem.
Note version constraints (MSRV, Python versions, Node engines).
Progressive: Load
modules/language-detection.md for detailed manifest heuristics.
Step 2: Plan Reproduction (bug-review:repro-plan
)
bug-review:repro-planIdentify reproduction methods:
- Unit/integration test suites
- Fuzzing tools
- Manual reproduction commands
Document exact commands:
cargo test -p core pytest tests/test_api.py npm test -- pkg
Verification: Run
pytest -v tests/test_api.py to verify.
Capture blockers and propose mocks when dependencies unavailable.
Step 3: Document Defects (bug-review:defects-documented
)
bug-review:defects-documentedReview code line-by-line, logging each bug with:
- File:line reference: Precise location
- Severity: Critical, High, Medium, Low
- Root cause: Logic error, API misuse, concurrency, resource leak
- Impact: What breaks and how
Run static analyzers (
cargo clippy, ruff check, golangci-lint, eslint).
Use
imbue:proof-of-work for reproducible capture.
Progressive: Load
modules/defect-documentation.md for classification details and analyzer commands.
Step 4: Prepare Fixes (bug-review:fixes-prepared
)
bug-review:fixes-preparedDraft minimal, idiomatic patches using language best practices:
- Guard clauses (Rust: pattern matching, Python: early returns)
- Resource cleanup (Go: defer, Python: context managers)
- Error propagation (Rust: ?, Go: wrapped errors)
Create tests following Red → Green pattern:
- Write failing test
- Apply minimal fix
- Verify test passes
Progressive: Load
modules/fix-preparation.md for language-specific patterns and test strategies.
Step 5: Verification Plan (bug-review:verification-plan
)
bug-review:verification-planExecute reproduction steps with fixes applied.
Capture evidence:
- Test output logs
- Benchmark comparisons
- Coverage reports
Document remaining risks using
imbue:diff-analysis/modules/risk-assessment-framework.
Assign owners and deadlines for follow-up items.
Defect Classification (Condensed)
Severity: Critical (crash/data loss) → High (broken features) → Medium (degraded UX) → Low (edge cases)
Root Causes: Logic errors | API misuse | Concurrency issues | Resource leaks | Validation gaps
Output Format
## Summary [Brief scope description] ## Defects Found ### [D1] file.rs:142 - Title - Severity: High - Root Cause: Logic error - Impact: Data corruption possible - Fix: [description] ## Proposed Fixes ### Fix for D1 [code diff with explanation] ## Test Updates [new/updated tests with Red → Green verification] ## Evidence - Commands executed - Logs and outputs - External references
Verification: Run
pytest -v to verify tests pass.
Best Practices
- Evidence-based: Every finding has file:line reference
- Reproducible: Clear steps to reproduce each bug
- Minimal fixes: Smallest change that fixes the issue
- Test coverage: Every fix has corresponding test
- Risk awareness: Document remaining risks with severity scoring
Exit Criteria
- All defects documented with precise references
- Fixes prepared with test coverage verified
- Verification plan includes commands and expected outputs
- Remaining risks assessed and owners assigned
Troubleshooting
Common Issues
Command not found Ensure all dependencies are installed and in PATH
Permission errors Check file permissions and run with appropriate privileges
Unexpected behavior Enable verbose logging with
--verbose flag