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 martineserios/thebrana --skill diagnosing-bugsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/martineserios/thebranaWrote 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/martineserios/thebrana/diagnosing-bugs)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/martineserios/thebrana/diagnosing-bugs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/martineserios/thebrana/diagnosing-bugs/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/martineserios/thebrana/diagnosing-bugs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/martineserios/thebrana/diagnosing-bugs.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 | $0.00040 | $0.02081 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.01040 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00416 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00208 |
Grade A, and why
diagnosing-bugs scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 10d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
Phase 1 is done when the loop is **tight** and **red-capable**: you can name **one command** — a script path, a test invocation, a curl — that you have **already run at least once** (show the invocation and its output, r This is a copy
92% identical to diagnosing-bugs — 58 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 — 141 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Diagnosing Bugs
A discipline for hard bugs. Skip phases only when explicitly justified.
When exploring the codebase, read CONTEXT.md (if it exists) to get a clear mental model of the relevant modules, and check ADRs in the area you're touching.
Redact
This skill has you show commands, outputs and captured artifacts. Redact every secret first — write <REDACTED> in its place. Build loops against env vars, so the credential stays in the environment rather than in what you show. Captured artifacts carry auth headers: quote only the lines that carry the signal.
If the redacted output is not enough to diagnose the bug, say so and ask the user.
Phase 1 — Build a feedback loop
This is the skill. Everything else is mechanical. If you have a tight pass/fail signal for the bug — one that goes red on this bug — you will find the cause; bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume it. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.
Spend disproportionate effort here. Be aggressive. Be creative. Refuse to give up.
Ways to construct one — try them in roughly this order
- Failing test at whatever seam reaches the bug — unit, integration, e2e.
- Curl / HTTP script against a running dev server.
- CLI invocation with a fixture input, diffing stdout against a known-good snapshot.
- Headless browser script (Playwright / Puppeteer) — drives the UI, asserts on DOM/console/network.
- Replay a captured trace. Save a real network request / payload / event log to disk; replay it through the code path in isolation.
- Throwaway harness. Spin up a minimal subset of the system (one service, mocked deps) that exercises the bug code path with a single function call.
- Property / fuzz loop. If the bug is "sometimes wrong output", run 1000 random inputs and look for the failure mode.
- Bisection harness. If the bug appeared between two known states (commit, dataset, version), automate "boot at state X, check, repeat" so you can
git bisect runit. - Differential loop. Run the same input through old-version vs new-version (or two configs) and diff outputs.
- HITL bash script. Last resort. If a human must click, drive them with
scripts/hitl-loop.template.shso the loop is still structured. Captured output feeds back to you.
What ships with it
2 files 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.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 141 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A b9339b09ee39
diagnosing-bugs is a skill published in the GitHub repository martineserios/thebrana (3 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 2,081 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). It is 92% identical to diagnosing-bugs, differing in 58 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
ask-codex
Consult OpenAI Codex for investigation, debugging, or code review. Use when user explicitly asks to "ask codex", "check with codex", "codex review", or as a last resort when stuck after 4+ failed attempts at debugging, investigation, or bug fix and completely out of ideas. Codex is slow (2-5 min), so only escalate…
root-cause-investigator
Systematic root cause analysis for errors, bugs, and unexpected behaviors using 5-Why methodology. Use when user reports errors, build failures, test failures, performance issues, integration problems, or any "it's not working" scenarios.
create-issue
Transitional alias — prefer /prflow:specs, which runs the same issue-drafting pipeline. Use when a rough user story, bug report, feature idea, piece of feedback, or an implementation plan should be recorded as a GitHub issue rather than built right now. This command name is retained so existing /prflow:create-issue…
retrospective-audit
Stage B of /prflow:retrospective-weekly: given a most-recent-first subset of one recurring pattern's occurrence-PR context bundles (bounded by auditbundlecap), re-derive the root cause and return one JSON object carrying a ranked findings array (one to three sub-patterns) — no edits, no worktree. Invoked as a subagent…
taiyi-health
A codebase health review process that samples recently changed production modules and test files, then checks for issues such as duplication, unused code, and unused dependencies.
root-cause
Find the mechanism behind a failure instead of patching its symptom - reproduce first, one variable per experiment with the prediction written before the run, exit by naming the mechanism and pinning it with a failing test. Use for a bug, an unexplained red test, or a failure that will not reproduce.