debug-test-failure

debug-test-failure is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from ArdurAI/ardur-agent. It costs 17 tokens per session (1,220 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A step-by-step method for diagnosing a failing automated test by treating its output as evidence before changing code. TDD, or test-driven development, is a practice of using tests to guide implementation; this tool focuses on investigating failures.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to inspect the complete error, isolate the failing test, compare expected and actual results, classify the failure, and look for related errors.
Why use it?
It reduces guesswork and helps identify the actual cause instead of applying a fix that only moves the failure elsewhere.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

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 skills/ardurai/ardur-agent/debug-test-failure
Any agent
npx skills add ArdurAI/ardur-agent --skill debug-test-failure
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ArdurAI/ardur-agent

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for debug-test-failure

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ardurai/ardur-agent/debug-test-failure.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/ardurai/ardur-agent/debug-test-failure)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ardurai/ardur-agent/debug-test-failure"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ardurai/ardur-agent/debug-test-failure.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 17 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,220 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 $0.00017 $0.01220
Opus 5 $0.00009 $0.00610
Sonnet 5 $0.00003 $0.00244
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00122

Measured 3d ago against content hash 703925695982, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

debug-test-failure 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 3d 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.

examples/skills/debug-test-failure/SKILL.md · 119 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 119 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Diagnosing a failing test

A failing test is a measurement, not an obstacle. Work the failure as evidence before touching any code. The goal is to know why it fails before you change anything — a fix applied without a diagnosis usually moves the failure rather than removing it.

1. Read the failure, all of it

Start from the raw output, not your memory of what the test does.

  • Find the assertion that failed and the exact line it failed on. Frameworks bury this under stack frames; the first frame inside your code is usually the one that matters.
  • Record the expected and actual values verbatim. The shape of the mismatch tells you a lot: off-by-one, wrong type, empty vs populated, None/null where a value was due, a timestamp or ordering difference.
  • Note whether it is an assertion failure, an uncaught exception, a timeout, or a panic/crash. These have different root-cause families — a timeout is rarely the same kind of bug as a wrong return value.
  • Scan for a second failure. The first error often causes the rest; fix the first and the cascade may clear.

2. Confirm it is the test you think it is

Run the single test in isolation before forming any theory:

# pick the form your runner uses
cargo test path::to::test_name -- --exact --nocapture
pytest tests/test_mod.py::test_name -x -vv
go test ./pkg -run '^TestName$' -v

Two outcomes, two meanings:

  • Fails in isolation — the bug is in the unit under test or this test's own setup. Good; you have a clean reproduction.
  • Passes in isolation, fails in the suite — this is a test-interaction bug: shared global state, leaked fixtures, ordering dependence, a database or temp file not reset between tests, or a parallel-execution race. Hunt the state that leaks across tests, not the assertion.

3. Isolate the assertion

Narrow the failure to the smallest claim that is false.

  • If the assertion compares a large structure, compare fields one at a time until you find the field that differs. Assert on that field alone.
  • If it loops, find the first iteration that fails and pin the inputs for that iteration.
  • Replace a complex expected value with an inline literal you computed by hand. If your hand-computed value also fails, the bug is in the code; if it passes, the bug was in how the test built its expectation.

Read the full file on GitHub · 119 lines

Files

What ships with it

1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.

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. 3d ago First seen · 119 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 703925695982

Subscribe to this mod's changes

debug-test-failure is a skill published in the GitHub repository ArdurAI/ardur-agent (2 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 1,220 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

analyze-agent-codebase

当用户希望依据源码、配置、schema 和测试,分析 Coding Agent、Agent 框架或多 Agent 系统的真实架构、执行流程、上下文、记忆、工具、权限或扩展点时使用。继续回答同一分析中的定向机制问题或整理专题文档时也使用。普通代码评审、实现或修复任务,以及不需要仓库证据的概念问答不使用。.

murray17/rovai-ai · 99 tokens

worktree

当用户明确要求使用 Git worktree,或需要为一项独立开发工作创建、查找、复用、交接或清理隔离工作目录时使用。普通只读任务、非 Git 仓库,以及当前工作无需独立分支或工作目录时不使用。.

murray17/rovai-ai · 66 tokens

member-studio

当用户希望创建新的 Rovai 队员,或继续调整、确认本次创建中尚未写入的队员名牌和头像方案时使用。普通成员资料咨询、编辑已创建队员,以及只设计角色或头像但不加入名册的任务不使用。.

murray17/rovai-ai · 65 tokens

campfire

当用户希望 Camp 中多位成员共同讨论、从不同角度分析、比较方案、评估利弊或讨论后形成建议时使用。主持人发起和继续整理讨论,成员在收到本次讨论任务时也使用。普通单人问题、无关发言、迟到补充和已经结束的讨论不使用。.

murray17/rovai-ai · 77 tokens

tasteful-ui

UI design and implementation for real product surfaces with taste-first critique, reference routing, project-specific design briefs, variation comparison, and implementation verification. Use when Codex should redesign, build, polish, or critique frontend UI by reading project context, exploring taste, routing through…

murray17/rovai-ai · 132 tokens

grill-duo-with-docs

当用户希望在 Camp 中通过持续追问和一位固定搭档的独立复核,澄清计划或设计,并同步维护已确认的领域词汇、当前权威文档或版本决策记录时使用。邀请者继续处理用户回答或当前搭档建议,成员收到文档版双人追问复核任务时也使用。普通单人问答、无需维护领域文档的追问、多人讨论、无关发言和已经结束的会话不使用。.

murray17/rovai-ai · 118 tokens