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 agentmods add skills/marcoguillermaz/tierward/systematic-debuggingnpx skills add marcoguillermaz/Tierward --skill systematic-debugginggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/marcoguillermaz/TierwardWrote 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/marcoguillermaz/tierward/systematic-debugging)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/marcoguillermaz/tierward/systematic-debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marcoguillermaz/tierward/systematic-debugging.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00031 | $0.00876 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00438 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00175 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00088 |
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 5d 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 — 84 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Systematic Debugging
Random fixes waste time and introduce new bugs. Quick patches mask root causes.
The Iron Law: complete Phase 1 before proposing any fix. Skipping Phase 1 is not using this skill.
When to use
Any technical issue: test failures, runtime bugs, unexpected output, build errors, integration failures, performance regressions.
Use especially when:
- "One quick fix" seems obvious — that intuition is untested
- You have already tried one fix and it did not work
- The issue appears in a multi-component system (CI → build → sign, API → service → DB)
Phase 1 — Reproduce & read evidence
Before any fix:
-
Read the error message fully. Stack traces, file paths, line numbers, error codes. Do not paraphrase — the text often contains the direct cause.
-
Reproduce consistently. List exact steps that trigger the issue. If not reproducible: add logging or assertions, gather more data, do not guess.
-
Check recent changes. What changed that could cause this? Git diff, new dependencies, config changes, environment differences.
-
In multi-component systems: add a log or assertion at each component boundary. Run once to identify which layer fails, then investigate that layer specifically.
Phase 2 — Pattern analysis
- Find working code similar to what is broken.
- List every difference between working and broken. Do not assume "that can't matter."
- Identify what the broken code depends on: config, state, environment, calling conventions.
Phase 3 — Hypothesize
Write the hypothesis before touching any code:
"The root cause is [X] because [Y]. Prediction: if X is true, then [Z] should also be observable."
Verify the prediction against Phase 1 evidence before proceeding.
* STOP — hypothesis written and verified against evidence. Wait for confirmation before Phase 4. *
Phase 4 — Fix the root cause
- Create a repro case before writing any fix — failing test, minimal script, or manual reproduction recipe. Must exist.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 84 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 38ce85056921
systematic-debugging is a skill published in the GitHub repository marcoguillermaz/Tierward (4 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 876 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
execution
Skill for managing local command execution and environment management with specsmith governance.
git
Skill for managing Git platform management with specsmith governance.
specsmith-architect
This skill enables an AI agent to conduct or assist with specsmith's epistemic BA interview flow, producing ARCHITECTURE.md, proposed REQs, and gap analysis reports grounded in real project knowledge.
zoo-code-integration
Use this skill when working in Zoo Code or Roo Code on a Specsmith-governed repository.
skills
This project follows the Agentic AI Development Workflow Specification (v0.20.1). Project type: CLI tool (Python) (Section 17.3). Description: Applied Epistemic Engineering toolkit for AI-assisted development. Governance backend for the Kairos terminal (BitConcepts/kairos)..
lmstudio-integration
Skill for integrating with LMStudio for local AI model serving with specsmith governance.