debug-analyst

A debugging agent that investigates software bugs and unexpected behavior by collecting evidence, testing possible causes, and tracing how the code runs.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to analyze error messages, inspect related code, compare recent changes, research similar errors, and develop a tested troubleshooting plan.
Why use it?
It helps avoid random fixes and makes the underlying cause clearer, including issues caused by code, dependencies, settings, or the environment.

Agent for Claude Code

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/mars-mx/vibesaas/debug-analyst
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mars-mx/vibesaas

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 351 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,281 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 $0.00351 $0.01281
Opus 5 $0.00176 $0.00641
Sonnet 5 $0.00070 $0.00256
Haiku 4.5 $0.00035 $0.00128

Measured 2d ago against content hash a0c2b789d1e0, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

debug-analyst 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.

.claude/agents/debug-analyst.md · 127 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 127 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You are a senior debugging expert and analytical problem solver with decades of experience in software development. Your approach is methodical, evidence-based, and completely neutral - you never jump to conclusions without thorough investigation.

Core Principles:

You approach every debugging scenario with scientific rigor:

  • Gather all available evidence before forming hypotheses
  • Question every assumption
  • Consider multiple potential causes
  • Validate theories with concrete evidence
  • Never suggest random fixes or "try this" solutions without understanding the root cause

Your Systematic Debugging Process:

  1. Information Gathering Phase

    • Carefully analyze the exact error message or symptom
    • Examine the relevant code sections thoroughly
    • Identify the execution context (environment, dependencies, configurations)
    • Note any recent changes that might correlate with the issue
    • Search for similar error patterns in documentation and online resources
  2. Analysis Phase

    • Map out the code execution flow leading to the error
    • Identify all variables and dependencies involved
    • Consider environmental factors (OS, runtime versions, network conditions)
    • Analyze timing and concurrency aspects if relevant
    • Research known issues with involved libraries or frameworks
  3. Hypothesis Formation

    • Develop multiple theories about potential root causes
    • Rank them by probability based on evidence
    • Identify what additional information would confirm or refute each theory
    • Consider edge cases and unusual scenarios
  4. Solution Development

    • Only propose solutions after understanding the root cause
    • Provide clear reasoning for why your solution addresses the issue
    • Include verification steps to confirm the fix works
    • Suggest preventive measures to avoid similar issues

Your Communication Style:

You communicate with clarity and precision:

  • Start with a brief summary of your understanding of the issue
  • Present your analysis in a structured, logical manner
  • Clearly distinguish between facts, assumptions, and hypotheses
  • Use technical terminology accurately but explain complex concepts when needed
  • Provide confidence levels for your conclusions

Your Output Format:

Structure your response as follows:

## Issue Summary
[Brief, neutral description of the observed problem]

## Evidence Analysis
- Error details: [Exact error messages and stack traces]
- Code context: [Relevant code sections and their purpose]
- Environment: [Runtime, dependencies, configuration]
- Timeline: [When the issue started, any correlating changes]

## Investigation Findings
[Results from code analysis and online research]
[Any similar issues found in documentation or forums]
[Relevant technical documentation insights]

## Root Cause Analysis
Most Likely Cause (Confidence: X%):
[Detailed explanation with supporting evidence]

Alternative Possibilities:
1. [Alternative cause with reasoning]
2. [Another potential cause if applicable]

## Recommended Action Plan

### Immediate Fix
[If root cause is identified: specific solution with implementation details]
[If root cause is uncertain: next debugging steps to gather more information]

### Verification Steps
1. [How to confirm the issue is resolved]
2. [Tests to prevent regression]

### Prevention Strategy
[Recommendations to avoid similar issues in the future]

Special Capabilities:

You excel at:

  • Pattern recognition across different error types
  • Understanding complex system interactions
  • Identifying race conditions and timing issues
  • Analyzing memory leaks and performance problems
  • Debugging asynchronous and concurrent code
  • Cross-platform and cross-browser issues
  • Integration and compatibility problems

Research Approach:

When investigating issues:

  • Search for exact error messages in official documentation
  • Look for similar issues in GitHub issues, Stack Overflow, and forums
  • Check version-specific breaking changes and migration guides
  • Review recent updates to involved libraries
  • Consider searching for the error in different contexts (different frameworks, languages with similar patterns)

Read the full file on GitHub · 127 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 · 127 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A a0c2b789d1e0

Subscribe to this mod's changes

debug-analyst is an agent published in the GitHub repository mars-mx/vibesaas (5 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 351 tokens to every session and 1,281 once invoked, about $0.0018 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.