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 commands/kumaran-is/claude-code-onboarding/debuggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kumaran-is/claude-code-onboardingWrote 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/commands/kumaran-is/claude-code-onboarding/debug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/kumaran-is/claude-code-onboarding/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/kumaran-is/claude-code-onboarding/debug.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 | $0.00040 | $0.00646 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00323 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00129 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00065 |
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 today.
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 — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Debug
Loads the systematic-debugging skill and enforces the 4-phase root-cause-first process.
Iron Law: NO fixes without root cause investigation first.
Input
$ARGUMENTS — description of the problem (e.g. "login fails intermittently", "NullPointerException in PaymentService:47", "Flutter app crashes on startup")
If $ARGUMENTS is empty, ask: "Describe the problem — paste the error message, stack trace, or reproduction steps."
Process
Load and follow systematic-debugging skill phases in order:
-
Phase 1 — Root Cause Investigation
- Read the error message completely (do not skim)
- Reproduce consistently — exact steps, every time?
- Check recent changes:
git log --oneline -10,git diff HEAD~1 - For multi-component systems: add diagnostic logging at each boundary before guessing
-
Phase 2 — Pattern Analysis
- Find a working equivalent in the codebase
- List every difference between working and broken
-
Phase 3 — Hypothesis and Testing
- Form ONE hypothesis: "I think X is the root cause because Y"
- Score it against alternatives using the hypothesis ranking table
- Test minimally — one variable at a time
-
Phase 4 — Implementation
- Write a failing test that reproduces the bug
- Fix the root cause, not the symptom
- Verify: test passes, no other tests broken
Output Format
🔍 Symptom: [what is observable — exact error, stack trace, behavior]
🔎 Investigation:
- Recent changes: [git log summary or "none in past 10 commits"]
- Reproduction: [reproducible every time / intermittent / unclear]
- Evidence gathered: [what was read/logged/traced]
🎯 Root Cause: [one sentence — what is actually wrong and why]
Hypothesis confidence: [X%] because [evidence]
✅ Fix: [the change — file:line]
🛡️ Prevention: [what would stop this class of bug recurring]
If You Hit 3+ Failed Fixes
Stop. Do not attempt Fix #4. Per systematic-debugging skill Phase 4.5:
- Each fix revealing a new problem in a different place = architectural issue
- Raise with the developer before continuing
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.
- today First seen · 74 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 1b57fe9214ce
debug is a command published in the GitHub repository kumaran-is/claude-code-onboarding (35 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 646 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.