Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Indemnity83/logistics. 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/Indemnity83/logistics/mc/26.2/.claude/skills/fix-bug/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Indemnity83/logisticsWrote 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/indemnity83/logistics/fix-bug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/indemnity83/logistics/fix-bug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/indemnity83/logistics/fix-bug.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 416 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00084 | $0.02800 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00042 | $0.01400 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00560 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00280 |
Grade A, and why
fix-bug 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 502 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Fix a bug
Fix one bug per pass.
The workflow is:
verify → prove → fix → confirm → PR
The proof is usually a regression test, but it may instead be a throwaway test or direct verification when a permanent test would cost more to maintain than the behavior it protects.
Input may be:
/fix-bug 1014
/fix-bug the quarry drops its frame when the chunk unloads
For a GitHub issue, read the entire issue and relevant linked issues before changing code. The issue is evidence, not ground truth.
Do not quietly widen scope. If you discover another defect while fixing this one, report or file it separately.
1. Verify the report
Before writing a test or changing production code, inspect the implementation and confirm:
- The reported symptom can actually occur.
- The suspected mechanism is correct, or determine the real mechanism.
- The bug exists on the branch where the issue claims it exists.
- The requested behavior is consistent with the surrounding system.
Issue reports are often right about the symptom and wrong about the mechanism or prescribed fix.
Examples seen in this repository include:
- an issue naming the wrong exception type while correctly identifying the failure path;
- a proposed guard depending on state the client cannot yet possess;
- an issue claiming there was no reasonable test shape when one existed;
- a bug affecting a newer Minecraft branch but not an older branch because the relevant code did not exist there.
Do not implement a reporter's proposed patch merely because it appears in the issue.
If the report is wrong but the correct fix is clear, remains within the described behavior, and does not introduce a product decision, fix the actual defect and explain the divergence in the PR.
Stop when:
- the defect cannot be reproduced or located;
- the expected behavior itself is ambiguous;
- the correct fix would intentionally change behavior beyond the issue's scope.
Do not make speculative production changes just to close an issue.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 502 lines · 84 tokens per session scan A 9819e3bcc231
fix-bug is a skill published in the GitHub repository Indemnity83/logistics (6 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 84 tokens to every session and 2,800 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-09-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
4-phase root cause debugging: understand bugs before fixing.
build-test
Run the project's build / typecheck / lint / test commands and emit the build.passing + tests.passing signals devloop convergence reads.
behavior-contract
Bug condition/postcondition formalization as testable Behavior Contracts. Defines invariants that must be preserved across fixes.
nw-bugfix
Bug fix workflow: root cause analysis → user review → regression test + fix via TDD.
test-first-bugs
Enforces a test-driven bug-fixing workflow. Use when a user reports a bug, failing code, an error, or asks to fix something.
refactoring-patterns
Systematic refactoring techniques, code smell elimination, pattern extraction, and legacy modernization.