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 autohandai/code-cli --skill systematic-debugginggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/autohandai/code-cliWrote 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/autohandai/code-cli/systematic-debugging)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/autohandai/code-cli/systematic-debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/autohandai/code-cli/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/autohandai/code-cli/systematic-debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/autohandai/code-cli/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 | $0.00043 | $0.00542 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00217 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00108 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00054 |
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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 49 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Debug systematically
A fix without a confirmed cause is a guess, and guesses cost more than they save. Work the four phases in order; do not propose code before Phase 3 confirms a cause.
Phase 1 — Reproduce and read
- Read the whole error: message, stack, exit code, the lines around it. The answer is often already there.
- Reproduce on purpose. Run the failing command, test, or scenario yourself with
run_command. If it cannot be reproduced, gather more evidence instead of guessing. - Note what changed:
git_logandgit_difffor the touched area, new dependencies, config, environment (CI vs local, OS, shell, terminal, load). - For multi-layer systems, add cheap instrumentation at each boundary and run once to see where the data goes wrong. Fix where it originates, not where it surfaces.
Phase 2 — Compare with what works
- Find the nearest working example in the same codebase and list every difference, however small. Do not assume a difference cannot matter.
- Read the reference implementation completely before adapting a pattern.
Phase 3 — One hypothesis, one test
- Write the hypothesis down in one sentence: "X causes Y because Z."
- Test it with the smallest possible change or probe. One variable at a time.
- If it fails, form a new hypothesis. Do not stack fixes. After three failed fixes, stop and question the design with the user; that is an architecture problem, not a bug.
Phase 4 — Fix with a regression test
- Write the failing test first; it must fail for the reason you found.
- Apply the single fix. No bundled refactors or "while I am here" edits.
- Run the test, the neighbouring suites, lint, and the project's proof command.
- Report what the cause was, what you changed, and what you verified. If the cause was environmental (load, disk, timing), say so with the evidence.
Red flags that mean "back to Phase 1"
"Quick fix for now", "just try changing X", "I do not fully understand but this might work", "one more attempt" after two failures.
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 · 49 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A 8209d5ed5f6c
systematic-debugging is a skill published in the GitHub repository autohandai/code-cli (205 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 542 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-15.
Other skills, from other repositories
evidence-audit
Evidence-led audit/fix rounds for any codebase in any language. Finds only defects that a runnable proof reproduces on current code, applies the narrowest in-scope patch, verifies with a second proof, promotes high-risk proofs to permanent regression tests, and reports exact validation results. Use whenever the user…
debugging
Use this skill when something is broken and the cause is unknown — a failing test, a crash, an error message, wrong output, a regression, a hang, or behaviour that differs between environments — and it has to be found and fixed at the root. Also use it to build the failing proof for a suspected defect before fixing…
ios-simulator
Verify and debug native, React Native, Expo, or Flutter apps on an iOS Simulator with agent-device. Use when an agent needs to launch an app, inspect its live UI, tap, type, scroll, validate a code change, collect failure evidence, or reproduce a workflow on an iPhone or iPad Simulator.
neuron-evaluation
Create and run AI evaluations with datasets, assertions, and output drivers in Neuron AI. Use this skill whenever the user mentions evaluation, testing AI systems, creating evaluators, dataset-driven testing, assertion-based validation, or wants to measure AI system performance. Also trigger for tasks involving…
neuron-test
Write tests for Neuron AI agents, RAG systems, workflows, and tools using the built-in testing utilities. Use this skill when the user mentions testing agents, writing unit tests, mocking AI providers, testing tool execution, verifying RAG retrieval, testing workflow behavior, or creating test cases for Neuron AI…
neuron-monitoring
Monitor Neuron AI agents and workflows with events observability, logging, and performance analysis. Use this skill whenever the user mentions debugging, monitoring, observability, performance analysis, tracing, or needs to understand why an agent is behaving a certain way. Also trigger for tasks involving agent…