Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to diillson/chatcli. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/diillson/chatcli/main/.agent/skills/systematic-debugging/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/diillson/chatcliWrote 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/diillson/chatcli/systematic-debugging)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/diillson/chatcli/systematic-debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/diillson/chatcli/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/diillson/chatcli/systematic-debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/diillson/chatcli/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 | $0.00025 | $0.00610 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00244 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00122 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00061 |
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.
This is a copy
89% identical to systematic-debugging — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 110 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Systematic Debugging
Source: obra/superpowers
Overview
This skill provides a structured approach to debugging that prevents random guessing and ensures problems are properly understood before solving.
4-Phase Debugging Process
Phase 1: Reproduce
Before fixing, reliably reproduce the issue.
## Reproduction Steps
1. [Exact step to reproduce]
2. [Next step]
3. [Expected vs actual result]
## Reproduction Rate
- [ ] Always (100%)
- [ ] Often (50-90%)
- [ ] Sometimes (10-50%)
- [ ] Rare (<10%)
Phase 2: Isolate
Narrow down the source.
## Isolation Questions
- When did this start happening?
- What changed recently?
- Does it happen in all environments?
- Can we reproduce with minimal code?
- What's the smallest change that triggers it?
Phase 3: Understand
Find the root cause, not just symptoms.
## Root Cause Analysis
### The 5 Whys
1. Why: [First observation]
2. Why: [Deeper reason]
3. Why: [Still deeper]
4. Why: [Getting closer]
5. Why: [Root cause]
Phase 4: Fix & Verify
Fix and verify it's truly fixed.
## Fix Verification
- [ ] Bug no longer reproduces
- [ ] Related functionality still works
- [ ] No new issues introduced
- [ ] Test added to prevent regression
Debugging Checklist
## Before Starting
- [ ] Can reproduce consistently
- [ ] Have minimal reproduction case
- [ ] Understand expected behavior
## During Investigation
- [ ] Check recent changes (git log)
- [ ] Check logs for errors
- [ ] Add logging if needed
- [ ] Use debugger/breakpoints
## After Fix
- [ ] Root cause documented
- [ ] Fix verified
- [ ] Regression test added
- [ ] Similar code checked
Common Debugging Commands
# Recent changes
git log --oneline -20
git diff HEAD~5
# Search for pattern
grep -r "errorPattern" --include="*.ts"
# Check logs
pm2 logs app-name --err --lines 100
Anti-Patterns
❌ Random changes - "Maybe if I change this..." ❌ Ignoring evidence - "That can't be the cause" ❌ Assuming - "It must be X" without proof ❌ Not reproducing first - Fixing blindly ❌ Stopping at symptoms - Not finding root cause
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 · 110 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 53b60eed01a4
systematic-debugging is a skill published in the GitHub repository diillson/chatcli (93 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 610 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to systematic-debugging, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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.
04-audit
Audit a codebase read-only across seven quality pillars into one ranked report. Use when the user wants to assess, health-check, or audit a codebase or one pillar. Not for fixing findings, reviewing a change, or checking a feature works.
07-refactor
Improve code across four axes (cleanup, performance, security, architecture) by scanning and fixing, or applying a pushed audit report. Use when the user wants to refactor, optimize, harden, or remove code. Not for read-only diagnosis or adding tests.
03-assert
Assert the work behaves by iterating the project's coding assertions until they pass, plus optional architecture and frontend facets. Use to validate an implementation. Not for reviewing or writing tests.
08-debug
Reproduce and fix a known bug, or find an unknown root cause by hypothesis validation. Use when the user wants to fix a bug, find why something breaks, or reopen a stuck investigation. Not for building a feature or reviewing a diff.