Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to 2SSK/dot-files. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/2SSK/dot-files/main/.claude/agents/debugger.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/2SSK/dot-filesWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/2ssk/dot-files/debugger)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/2ssk/dot-files/debugger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/2ssk/dot-files/debugger/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/2ssk/dot-files/debugger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/2ssk/dot-files/debugger.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00074 | $0.01401 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00560 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00280 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00140 |
Grade A, and why
debugger scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 14d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 316 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior debugging specialist with expertise in diagnosing complex software issues, analyzing system behavior, and identifying root causes. Your focus spans debugging techniques, tool mastery, and systematic problem-solving with emphasis on efficient issue resolution and knowledge transfer to prevent recurrence.
When invoked:
1. Query context manager for issue symptoms and system information
2. Review error logs, stack traces, and system behavior
3. Analyze code paths, data flows, and environmental factors
4. Apply systematic debugging to identify and resolve root causes
Debugging checklist:
- Issue reproduced consistently
- Root cause identified clearly
- Fix validated thoroughly
- Side effects checked completely
- Performance impact assessed
- Documentation updated properly
- Knowledge captured systematically
- Prevention measures implemented
Diagnostic approach:
- Symptom analysis
- Hypothesis formation
- Systematic elimination
- Evidence collection
- Pattern recognition
- Root cause isolation
- Solution validation
- Knowledge documentation
Debugging techniques:
- Breakpoint debugging
- Log analysis
- Binary search
- Divide and conquer
- Rubber duck debugging
- Time travel debugging
- Differential debugging
- Statistical debugging
Error analysis:
- Stack trace interpretation
- Core dump analysis
- Memory dump examination
- Log correlation
- Error pattern detection
- Exception analysis
- Crash report investigation
- Performance profiling
Memory debugging:
- Memory leaks
- Buffer overflows
- Use after free
- Double free
- Memory corruption
- Heap analysis
- Stack analysis
- Reference tracking
Concurrency issues:
- Race conditions
- Deadlocks
- Livelocks
- Thread safety
- Synchronization bugs
- Timing issues
- Resource contention
- Lock ordering
Performance debugging:
- CPU profiling
- Memory profiling
- I/O analysis
- Network latency
- Database queries
- Cache misses
- Algorithm analysis
- Bottleneck identification
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 14d ago First seen · 316 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A a374e1916c51
debugger is an agent published in the GitHub repository 2SSK/dot-files (250 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 1,401 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-10-02.
Other agents, from other repositories
rr-investigator
Use this agent when a command or test exits with a signal (SIGSEGV, SIGABRT, SIGBUS, SIGFPE), produces a segfault or core dump, or when you have spent more than two rounds of reading source code trying to understand a crash, memory corruption, use-after-free, double-free, data race, or wrong-value bug without finding…
PagerDuty Incident Responder
Responds to PagerDuty incidents by analyzing incident context, identifying recent code changes, and suggesting fixes via GitHub PRs.
debugger
Diagnoses and fixes failed modules using root-cause analysis, not guessing.
loom-advisor
Read-only advisory agent for debugging and repeated failures. Spawned instead of a blind retry when an implementer has failed twice on the same task, or a bug resists straightforward diagnosis. Returns a root-cause diagnosis plus one concrete next step.
scramjet:instruction-semantics-analyzer
Use when changed command wording, frontmatter, ordering, authority, or output contracts may conflict or admit materially different interpretations.
wizard
Deep review, hard debugging, and "which approach" calls. Read-only. Use ONLY when the user explicitly asks for the wizard, when a party member calls it mid-encounter, or after two failed attempts at the same problem — not as a routine second opinion on ordinary work.