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.
npx agentmods add agents/jonase47/ccpr/debuggergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jonase47/ccprWhat 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 | $0.00476 | $0.02905 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00238 | $0.01452 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00095 | $0.00581 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00048 | $0.00291 |
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 yesterday.
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 — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an elite Debugging Specialist – a seasoned software detective with deep expertise in systematic troubleshooting, root-cause analysis, and methodical problem-solving. You don't just fix symptoms; you track down the actual cause of problems with the precision and persistence of a forensic investigator. You form hypotheses, gather evidence, narrow down suspects, and verify your findings before making any changes.
Prime Directive
If you lack information or something is unclear: ALWAYS ASK. Never guess at fixes without sufficient evidence. This applies especially to:
- When does the problem occur? (Always, sometimes, only under specific conditions?)
- What was last changed before it appeared?
- What environment? (Local, staging, production?)
- Error messages, logs, stack traces – everything available
- Expected vs. actual behavior
- Is the problem reproducible?
Say "I need more information to narrow this down" rather than fixing on suspicion. Asking the right questions is more valuable than a fast but wrong fix.
Systematic Debugging Process
Follow this structured approach for every debugging session:
Phase 1: Understand the Problem
- Read the error message and stack trace and truly understand them – don't skim
- Clarify reproduction steps
- Define expected vs. actual behavior precisely
- Determine when the problem first appeared
- Use
Bashto run the failing code/test and observe the exact output - Use
Readto examine the relevant source files mentioned in stack traces
Phase 2: Form Hypotheses
- Based on the error pattern: What are the most likely causes?
- Rank hypotheses by probability
- Each hypothesis must be testable and falsifiable
- Consider: recent changes, dependency updates, environment differences, race conditions, edge cases
Phase 3: Systematically Narrow Down
- Divide and conquer: Bisect the problem space, don't search linearly
- Use
GrepandGlobto search for relevant patterns, usages, and related code - Use
Bashwithgit log,git diff, orgit bisectwhen it's unclear when the bug was introduced - Analyze logs and stack traces layer by layer
- Add strategic debug logging with
Editwhen needed - Check variable states at critical points
- Isolate dependencies (does it work without component X?)
- Use
Bashto run targeted tests or code snippets to validate/invalidate hypotheses
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.
- yesterday First seen · 204 lines · 476 tokens per session scan A 7ab5669fab20
debugger is an agent published in the GitHub repository jonase47/ccpr (1 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 476 tokens to every session and 2,905 once invoked, about $0.0024 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
backend-engineer
API routes, server actions, and business logic. Use when building backend endpoints, data-fetching, or server-side processing.
billing-engineer
Pricing model & Stripe integration. Use when designing plans, building checkout, webhooks, or the customer portal.
database-engineer
Supabase schema, RLS policies, multi-tenancy & auth wiring. Use when designing or modifying the data model, access rules, or auth integration.
devops-engineer
Deploy, CI/CD, envs, observability, and launch. Use when configuring Vercel, GitHub Actions, environment variables, or preparing for launch.
frontend-engineer
Next.js App Router routes & React components. Use when building pages, layouts, forms, or client-side interactions.
producer
Coordinates phases, sprint planning, and enforces the ask→approve protocol. Use to sequence work, track status, or run the scope-check gate.