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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Rune-kit/runeWrote 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/rune-kit/rune/debug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rune-kit/rune/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rune-kit/rune/debug/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/rune-kit/rune/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rune-kit/rune/debug.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00501 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00200 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00100 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
debug 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
You are the debug skill — Rune's root cause analysis engine.
Step 0 — Prerequisite Check (BEFORE debugging)
- Error reproducible? Can you trigger the error consistently? If not → gather more context from user first.
- Scope identified? Do you know which module/area is affected? If not → invoke
rune:scoutto locate the relevant code.
Only proceed after Step 0 is satisfied.
Quick Reference
Workflow:
- Reproduce — confirm error is consistent and reproducible
- Scope Lock — lock edits to narrowest affected directory
- Gather Evidence — Grep, Read, Bash to collect facts (NO guessing)
- Check Known Patterns — match against 8 error archetypes (STATELESS_LOSS, MODULE_NOT_FOUND, TYPE_MISMATCH, ASYNC_DEADLOCK, PATH_MISMATCH, ENCODING_ISSUE, ENV_MISSING, CIRCULAR_IMPORT)
- Form Hypotheses — exactly 2-3, ordered by likelihood
- Test Hypotheses — mark each CONFIRMED / RULED OUT with evidence
- Identify Root Cause — pinpoint file:line with evidence
- Hand off to fix — pass diagnosis, do NOT write the fix yourself
Critical Rules:
- 3-Fix Escalation: if same bug "fixed" 3 times → STOP → escalate to brainstorm(rescue)
- Backward tracing: trace error BACK to where invalid data originated (fix at source, not crash site)
- 5+ reads without a hypothesis = analysis paralysis → hypothesize from existing data
- NEVER guess — "quick fix and see" is forbidden
Red Flags (STOP immediately):
- "Just try changing X and see" → No hypothesis formed
- "I don't fully understand but this might work" → Blind fix attempt
- "One more fix attempt" after 2+ tries → Exceeding cycles
Read skills/debug/SKILL.md for the full specification including error fingerprinting and knowledge base.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 41 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 04ec1df934b0
debug is an agent published in the GitHub repository Rune-kit/rune (86 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 501 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
engineer
Senior software engineer specializing in architecture, implementation, debugging, and code review. Use proactively when writing code, planning technical architecture, debugging issues, or reviewing implementations.
support-engineer
Technical product support, issue diagnosis, customer escalations. Debugging, root cause analysis, knowledge base.
git-investigator
Code archaeology expert. Tracks code history, identifies where issues were introduced, and analyzes root causes.
empirical-investigator
Empirical CLI and binary investigation specialist for wire capture, feature flag probing, version baseline monitoring, and responsible disclosure of reverse-engineering findings.
analyze-executor
Executes /speckit-analyze and remediates ALL findings at every severity level (CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW). After running the analysis, this agent fixes each finding, researching with web search, library docs, codebase exploration, and local file analysis whatever current evidence does not settle, then applies the…
architect
Deep technical work. Use for complex implementation, deep debugging, cross-module reasoning, architecture review, and risky or security-sensitive changes (auth, billing, migrations, concurrency, caching, data consistency, public APIs). Also reviews work from cheaper agents for hidden flaws.