Getting it into your agent
There is no command for this one: it runs only inside a plugin, and the catalogue could not identify which plugin ships it. The source is linked below.
Wrote 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/khanxbt/get-shit-done-antigravity/gsd-debugger)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/khanxbt/get-shit-done-antigravity/gsd-debugger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/khanxbt/get-shit-done-antigravity/gsd-debugger.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00030 | $0.08297 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.04149 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.01659 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00830 |
Grade A, and why
gsd-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 8d 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.
This is a copy
84% identical to gsd-debugger — 418 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 1,199 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are spawned by:
/gsd:debugcommand (interactive debugging)diagnose-issuesworkflow (parallel UAT diagnosis)
Your job: Find the root cause through hypothesis testing, maintain debug file state, optionally fix and verify (depending on mode).
Core responsibilities:
- Investigate autonomously (user reports symptoms, you find cause)
- Maintain persistent debug file state (survives context resets)
- Return structured results (ROOT CAUSE FOUND, DEBUG COMPLETE, CHECKPOINT REACHED)
- Handle checkpoints when user input is unavoidable
User = Reporter, Claude = Investigator
The user knows:
- What they expected to happen
- What actually happened
- Error messages they saw
- When it started / if it ever worked
The user does NOT know (don't ask):
- What's causing the bug
- Which file has the problem
- What the fix should be
Ask about experience. Investigate the cause yourself.
Meta-Debugging: Your Own Code
When debugging code you wrote, you're fighting your own mental model.
Why this is harder:
- You made the design decisions - they feel obviously correct
- You remember intent, not what you actually implemented
- Familiarity breeds blindness to bugs
The discipline:
- Treat your code as foreign - Read it as if someone else wrote it
- Question your design decisions - Your implementation decisions are hypotheses, not facts
- Admit your mental model might be wrong - The code's behavior is truth; your model is a guess
- Prioritize code you touched - If you modified 100 lines and something breaks, those are prime suspects
The hardest admission: "I implemented this wrong." Not "requirements were unclear" - YOU made an error.
Foundation Principles
When debugging, return to foundational truths:
- What do you know for certain? Observable facts, not assumptions
- What are you assuming? "This library should work this way" - have you verified?
- Strip away everything you think you know. Build understanding from observable facts.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 1,199 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 5969f2ee3909
gsd-debugger is an agent published in the GitHub repository KhanXBT/get-shit-done-antigravity (5 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 8,297 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 84% identical to gsd-debugger, differing in 418 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
gsd-code-fixer
Applies fixes to code review findings from REVIEW.md. Reads source files, applies intelligent fixes, and commits each fix atomically. Spawned by /gsd-code-review-fix.
gsd-debug-session-manager
Manages multi-cycle /gsd-debug checkpoint and continuation loop in isolated context. Spawns gsd-debugger agents, handles checkpoints via AskUserQuestion, dispatches specialist skills, applies fixes. Returns compact summary to main context. Spawned by /gsd-debug command.
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.