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/nicelight/DevRails-26Wrote 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/nicelight/devrails-26/debug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/nicelight/devrails-26/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/nicelight/devrails-26/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/commands/nicelight/devrails-26/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/nicelight/devrails-26/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 | $0.00014 | $0.01135 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00454 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00227 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00113 |
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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 116 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/debug - Diagnose one TASK failure
<input_contract>
Expected $ARGUMENTS: one TASK-NNN-TN-FT-NNN-WN with an observed failure
bound to the current Execution Attempt and actual change surface.
Read the indexed task card, direct task-linked specs, current-attempt protocol and handoff, functional/semantic verdict evidence, actual changes, and only the callers or boundaries needed to trace the failure. Missing reproduction or evidence is a valid diagnostic input and must remain explicit.
After root-cause confirmation, inspect only relevant prior diagnostic, execution, verification, bug, or repository-history evidence needed to compare the mechanism. Keep missing history explicit. </input_contract>
<hard_invariants>
- Diagnosis is read-only over implementation, tests, specs, task records,
protocols, scheduler state, and external systems. The only allowed write is
this command's report under
.tasks/<TASK_ID>/. - Do not change status, tier, dependencies, scope, Execution Attempt, retry budget, or permissions.
- Do not issue functional/semantic verdicts, accept product/spec/architecture decisions, implement a correction, or create BUG/follow-up work.
- Recurrence and prevention are advisory evidence. Do not infer recurrence from similar symptoms or absence of a prior match, create a durable rule without a confirmed material recurring mechanism, or expand current task authority.
- A probe may mutate only known local isolated or disposable state with safe rerun and cleanup. It grants no production, destructive, privileged, secret, or external permission. When safety or initial state is uncertain, do not run it and keep the diagnosis inconclusive.
- Keep tracing task-scoped. Neighboring callers and boundaries are evidence, not authority to expand the task. </hard_invariants>
<agent_discretion>
Choose the smallest evidence-producing path. Useful tactics include reproducing
the symptom with exact inputs/environment, reading the complete failure,
tracing symptom -> immediate cause -> caller/source -> first violated invariant, and testing one evidence-backed hypothesis at a time with a
distinguishing experiment. Condition-based waiting is usually preferable for
async or flaky behavior. No fixed phase model, checklist, script, or mandatory
failing test is required.
</agent_discretion>
<required_outputs> Write exactly:
.tasks/<TASK_ID>/<TASK_ID>-S-DEBUG-final-report-docs-01.md
Include:
- symptom and reproduction, or the exact evidence gap;
- current Execution Attempt and actual change surface;
- confirmed root cause plus first violated invariant, or
inconclusive; - experiments and only materially useful rejected hypotheses;
- minimum recommended correction;
- suitable regression check;
- recurrence:
repeated_confirmed|no_prior_evidence|unclassified, with inspected evidence scope.repeated_confirmedrequires a prior failure with the same causal mechanism and first violated invariant;no_prior_evidenceis scoped to inspected history; insufficient evidence isunclassified; - for
repeated_confirmed, prior evidence locators, the previous correction and why it failed to prevent recurrence, or the exact correction-history gap; - for a material
repeated_confirmed, one cheapest sufficient prevention guardrail — test, invariant, contract, lint/tooling check, runbook condition, or architecture boundary — with canonical artifact/owner, owning workflow, and adoption check; otherwise no guardrail and the reason; - residual uncertainty and next owner;
- exactly one standalone marker:
DIAGNOSIS: CONFIRMED|INCONCLUSIVE
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 · 116 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 69374b4fca36
debug is a command published in the GitHub repository nicelight/DevRails-26 (23 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 1,135 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 commands, from other repositories
qa-changes
This skill should be used when the user asks to "QA a pull request", "test PR changes", "verify a PR works", "functionally test changes", or when an automated workflow triggers QA validation of code changes. Provides a structured methodology for setting up the environment, exercising changed behavior, and reporting…
react-native
Command "react-native" from getsentry/toolkit, covering xcode build step (react-native xcode) and important notes.
auditar-cascading
Invoca cascading-failures-auditor — audita serviço para 5 triggers de cascade (sem timeout, retry sem jitter, sem circuit breaker, sem deadline, queue unbounded) e gera CASCADING-AUDIT.md.
http-service
Build, review or debug a Bun HTTP service. Loads the http-service skill, then works the task through its workflow.
doctor
Diagnosticar y reparar problemas del framework Don Cheli, git y entorno. Usa cuando el usuario dice "doctor", "problemas del framework", "don cheli no funciona", "repair Don Cheli", "debug setup", "setup broken", "framework broken", "reparar entorno". Detecta y repara issues de configuración, git y dependencias…
doctor
Badi configuration validation. Checks all Badi components and produces a diagnostic report.