
Fix
- 221 installs
- 52 repo stars
- Updated July 6, 2026
- buiducnhat/agent-skills
Debug and repair broken code paths, failing tests, and runtime exceptions using an agent-guided fix loop from reproduction through patch and verification.
About
General-purpose agent fix skill from buiducnhat for debugging and repairing code defects, guiding agents through reproduction, root-cause analysis, targeted patches, and verification across typical application codebases.
- Reproduce-then-fix loop
- Root cause diagnosis
- Patch and verify cycle
- Works across common stacks
Fix by the numbers
- 221 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #162 of 596 Debugging skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Jul 28, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/buiducnhat/agent-skills --skill fixAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 221 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 52 |
| Last updated | July 6, 2026 |
| Repository | buiducnhat/agent-skills ↗ |
What it does
Debug and repair broken code paths, failing tests, and runtime exceptions using an agent-guided fix loop from reproduction through patch and verification.
Files
Fix
Scope Gate (Required Before Starting)
Use this skill only when all conditions below are true:
1. Concrete issue signal exists
- Clear failing behavior, error, or regression is identified
- Enough evidence exists to begin diagnosis (logs, stack trace, failing test, or reproducible steps)
2. Likely localized fix path
- Issue appears constrained to a small area
- No expected cross-system redesign or migration
3. Low-to-moderate architectural risk
- Fix can be made without foundational changes
- No phased rollout/feature-flag strategy is expected
4. Straightforward verification path
- Reproduction and post-fix checks can be run in practical scope
- Success criteria can be validated directly
If any condition fails, escalate to brainstorm or write-plan.
Hard Stop Escalation Criteria
Immediately stop and switch to planning if any of these occur:
- Root cause remains unclear after focused investigation
- Fix requires cross-cutting architectural or data-model changes
- Scope expands into large refactor or multi-module migration
- Security/compliance-sensitive behavior is involved
- Verification reveals broad regressions requiring phased mitigation
- Multiple fix attempts fail without converging on a root cause
Escalation action:
1. Stop all implementation activities. 2. Output the exact message: "This fix exceeds safe single-pass debugging limits. Ask, Recommend brainstorm or write-plan first to define phased diagnosis, implementation, and risk controls."
Workflow
Step 1: Intake and Contextualize
1. Understand the reported bug and define explicit expected behavior. 2. Collect/confirm minimum bug report fields:
- Title
- Expected behavior
- Actual behavior
- Reproduction steps
- Evidence (logs, trace, screenshot, failing test output)
- Environment (branch/OS/runtime/version if relevant)
- Impact/severity
3. Load only the project context relevant to the bug:
- If
docs/SUMMARY.mdexists, read it first. - Load only task-relevant detail docs.
- Prioritize
Code Standarddocs for implementation conventions. - If docs conflict with code or user intent, use the available input/question tool before broad changes.
Step 2: Reproduce and Diagnose
1. Reproduce the issue consistently. 2. Locate the failure point (file/function/line range/subsystem). 3. Trace control/data flow to identify the root cause. 4. Form a fix hypothesis and confirm it explains observed behavior.
Guidelines:
- Read surrounding code, not only the failing line.
- Prefer root-cause correction over symptom patching.
- Add temporary diagnostics only when needed; remove them after use.
Step 3: Decide Small vs Bigger Fix
Classify the work before coding:
Small fix (continue in this skill)
Most are true:
- Root cause is clear and validated
- Change surface is narrow (typically a few files)
- Regression risk is limited and testable quickly
Bigger/risky fix (escalate to brainstorm or write-plan)
Any are true:
- Root cause is uncertain
- Multiple subsystems must change together
- Requires migration, rollout sequencing, or broad refactor
- Risk cannot be reasonably controlled in a single pass
If it is a bigger fix, follow Hard Stop Escalation Criteria.
Step 4: Implement (Small Fix Path)
1. State a brief 1-3 bullet implementation plan. 2. Apply the smallest targeted change that resolves the root cause. 3. Keep scope strict; avoid unrelated refactors. 4. Add/update regression tests when applicable.
Step 5: Verify
Run validation in increasing scope:
1. Focused checks for the changed behavior/module 2. Nearby regression checks 3. Relevant project checks (lint/typecheck/tests/build) as needed
Fix is complete only when:
- Reproduction no longer fails
- Expected behavior is confirmed
- No critical regressions are introduced
If verification indicates broader impact, escalate to brainstorm or write-plan.
Step 6: Complete and Report
Provide a concise completion report with:
- Root cause
- What changed
- Why this fix works
- Verification performed and results
- Residual risks / follow-ups
If behavior or documentation-relevant rules changed, update the minimal relevant docs. If architecture changed, this should have been escalated.
Rules
- Do not guess when key context is missing.
- Always prioritize root-cause fixes.
- Keep blast radius minimal.
- Do not mark done without verification.
- Escalate early when scope/risk exceeds this skill.
Optional Bug Report Template
Use when the report is incomplete:
- Title:
- Expected behavior:
- Actual behavior:
- Reproduction steps:
- Error logs/stack trace:
- Environment:
- Impact/severity:
- Additional context:
Related skills
Forks & variants (1)
Fix has 1 known copy in the catalog totaling 39 installs. They canonicalize to this original listing.
- buiducnhat - 39 installs