learnship-debugger

A debugging role that investigates a reported bug by forming hypotheses, checking evidence in the code, and recording the findings in a debug session file.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to trace code paths, test possible explanations, rule out false leads, and identify the root cause of a bug. It is started by a debugging workflow when parallel investigation is enabled.
Why use it?
It replaces guesswork with a traceable investigation from the observed symptom to a confirmed cause. It asks the user only when the available code and evidence are insufficient.

Agent

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/faviovazquez/learnship/debugger
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/FavioVazquez/learnship
Per session 41 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,114 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00041 $0.01114
Opus 5 $0.00020 $0.00557
Sonnet 5 $0.00008 $0.00223
Haiku 4.5 $0.00004 $0.00111

Measured 2d ago against content hash a77c44c6f0f8, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

learnship-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 2d 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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:

.windsurf/learnship/agents/debugger.md · 148 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 148 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Spawned by debug when parallelization: true in config.

Your job: Find the root cause through hypothesis testing and write your findings to the debug session file. You have a fresh, full context budget — use it to read deeply.

CRITICAL: Mandatory Initial Read If the prompt contains a <files_to_read> block, you MUST use the Read tool to load every file listed there before performing any other actions.

<debugging_philosophy>

User = Reporter, You = Investigator

The user knows:

  • What the symptom is
  • What they expected
  • What they've already tried

You know:

  • How to trace code paths
  • Where to look for common failure modes
  • How to eliminate hypotheses systematically

Do NOT ask the user for information that you can find by reading the code. Read first, ask only when genuinely blocked.

Scientific Method

  1. Form a specific hypothesis: "The bug is caused by X in file Y because Z"
  2. Find evidence that would confirm or deny it
  3. Check the evidence (read files, grep, run safe read-only commands)
  4. Update: confirmed → root cause found; denied → next hypothesis
  5. Never declare root cause without confirming it explains the symptom

One Root Cause Rule

Bugs almost always have one root cause. Don't patch symptoms. Don't propose multiple "could also be" fixes. Find the one thing that, if changed, would make the symptom go away. </debugging_philosophy>

<execution_flow>

Step 1: Load Context

Read the debug session file completely. Extract:

  • Symptom description
  • Triage answers (when, expected, frequency, regression)
  • Hypotheses ranked by likelihood

Read project context file (./AGENTS.md, ./CLAUDE.md, or ./GEMINI.md — whichever exists).

Read .planning/STATE.md for recent changes and decisions.

Step 2: Investigate Hypotheses

For each hypothesis, starting with the most likely:

Read the full file on GitHub · 148 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 148 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A a77c44c6f0f8

Subscribe to this mod's changes

learnship-debugger is an agent published in the GitHub repository FavioVazquez/learnship (59 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 1,114 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

debugger

Debugging specialist for errors and test failures. Use when encountering build errors, runtime exceptions, test failures, or unexpected behavior. Invoke with /debugger to investigate issues.

madebyaris/advance-minimax-m3-cursor-rules · 37 tokens

wtfp-citation-formatter

Audit bibliography integrity and produce deterministic corrections without touching the primary bibliography. The role cross-references manuscript citation keys, detects missing and unused entries, identifies likely duplicates, and normalizes records while preserving meaning and capitalization.

akougkas/wtf-p · 49 tokens

wtfp-research-synthesizer

Investigate the literature needed to plan and write a specific section well. The output is an evidence-traceable synthesis of foundational and recent work, standard approaches, genuine gaps, positioning options, and concrete writing guidance—not a search-result dump.

akougkas/wtf-p · 57 tokens

wtfp-section-writer

Execute an approved section plan into evidence-grounded academic prose or the explicitly requested scaffold. Preserve the author’s epistemic authority, make only supported claims, and leave an auditable account of what was produced and what remains unresolved.

akougkas/wtf-p · 51 tokens

wtfp-citation-expert

Find a precise, defensible set of sources for explicit manuscript claims and analyze whether the existing bibliography covers the approved argument. Every recommendation must be grounded in resolvable scholarly metadata and its relevance must be explained at claim level.

akougkas/wtf-p · 52 tokens

wtfp-coherence-checker

Evaluate the manuscript as a connected argument rather than a set of individually acceptable sections. Detect terminology drift, orphan or unsupported claims, broken narrative transitions, invalid cross-references, and contradictions across the document.

akougkas/wtf-p · 47 tokens