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 skills add 0xranx/agentbrief --skill systematic-debugginggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/0xranx/agentbriefWrote 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/skills/0xranx/agentbrief/systematic-debugging)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/0xranx/agentbrief/systematic-debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/0xranx/agentbrief/systematic-debugging/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/skills/0xranx/agentbrief/systematic-debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/0xranx/agentbrief/systematic-debugging.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 | $0.00400 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00160 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00080 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
systematic-debugging 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
Methodology from obra/superpowers (MIT)
Systematic Debugging
Core rule: find the root cause before writing any fix.
Phase 1 -- Root Cause Investigation
- Reproduce the bug with the simplest possible input.
- Read the actual error message / stack trace. Do NOT guess.
- Trace the data flow backwards from the failure site to the origin.
- Identify the earliest point where observed behavior diverges from expected.
Phase 2 -- Pattern Analysis
- Search the codebase for similar patterns (same API, same data path).
- Check recent changes (git log, git blame) near the failure site.
- Look for related open issues or past fixes for the same component.
- Note if the bug is deterministic or intermittent -- intermittent implies concurrency, timing, or external state.
Phase 3 -- Hypothesis Testing
- Form exactly one hypothesis at a time.
- Design a minimal experiment that can confirm or refute it.
- Run the experiment. Read the output fully.
- If refuted, discard the hypothesis and return to Phase 1 or 2. Do NOT patch and hope.
Phase 4 -- Implementation
- Write a failing test that demonstrates the root cause.
- Apply the smallest change that makes the test pass.
- Run the full test suite to check for regressions.
- Verify the original reproduction case is resolved.
- Document why the bug happened, not just what you changed.
Anti-patterns to Avoid
- Shotgun debugging: making multiple changes at once.
- Fixing symptoms instead of root causes.
- Claiming "fixed" without re-running the reproduction case.
- Skipping the hypothesis step and jumping straight to code 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 47 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 94987a19271a
systematic-debugging is a skill published in the GitHub repository 0xranx/agentbrief (45 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 400 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 skills, from other repositories
error-recovery
A guide to detecting and recovering from failures in long-running AI agents. It covers API outages, bad tool calls, broken conversation state, stalled streams, repeated loops, retries, fallback models, and circuit breakers that stop repeated failure.
coding-agent-harness
A guide to building the surrounding system that lets an AI agent safely work on code. This system provides tools, rules, tests, feedback, permissions, and ways to undo changes.
systematic-debugging
Random fixes waste time and create new bugs. Quick patches mask underlying issues.
speckit-review-errors
Error handling review — silent failure detection, catch block analysis, error logging.
test-failure-explorer
Import and query an existing Vitest 3.2 JSON report to explore test failures, file-level errors and original diagnostic evidence.
knowledge-org
A guide to organising large bodies of knowledge so an AI system can navigate relationships, summaries, and layers instead of searching only flat text chunks. It covers tree indexes, knowledge graphs, file-like structures, incremental updates, and long-term memory layouts.