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 MereWhiplash/engram-cogitator --skill debugginggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MereWhiplash/engram-cogitatorWrote 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/merewhiplash/engram-cogitator/debugging)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/merewhiplash/engram-cogitator/debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/merewhiplash/engram-cogitator/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/merewhiplash/engram-cogitator/debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/merewhiplash/engram-cogitator/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 | $0.00024 | $0.00705 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00282 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00141 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00071 |
Grade A, and why
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 — 164 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Systematic Debugging
Find the root cause before attempting fixes.
Announce: "I'm using the debugging skill to investigate this issue."
The Rule
NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST
The Phases
Investigate → Analyze → Hypothesize → Fix
Phase 1: Investigate
Before any fix attempt:
1. EC Search First
ec_search:
query: [error message or symptom]
ec_search:
query: [affected component]
type: learning
Check if we've seen this before. Prior solutions save time.
2. Read Error Messages
- Don't skip past errors
- Read stack traces completely
- Note line numbers, file paths
3. Reproduce
- Can you trigger it reliably?
- What are the exact steps?
- Does it happen every time?
4. Check Recent Changes
git log --oneline -10
git diff HEAD~5
What changed that could cause this?
5. Trace Data Flow
Where does the bad value come from?
- Start at the error
- Trace backwards through the call stack
- Find the source, not the symptom
Phase 2: Pattern Analysis
Find Working Examples
Look for similar working code:
- Same pattern elsewhere in codebase
- Reference implementations
- Documentation examples
Search EC for established patterns:
ec_search:
query: [pattern name]
type: pattern
Compare
What's different between working and broken?
Phase 3: Hypothesis
State clearly: "I think X is the root cause because Y"
Test with the smallest possible change. One variable at a time.
If hypothesis wrong: Form new hypothesis. Don't pile fixes.
Phase 4: Fix @tdd
1. Write Failing Test
Reproduce the bug in a test first (RED).
2. Implement Fix
Address the root cause, not the symptom (GREEN).
3. Verify @verifying
Load project config for commands:
ec_search:
query: project config
type: config
Run verification:
- Bug test passes
- Other tests still pass
- Original symptom gone
4. Store Learning
If root cause was non-obvious:
ec_add:
type: learning
area: [component]
content: [What was wrong, why it happened, how to recognize it]
rationale: Discovered while debugging [symptom]
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 · 164 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 0c65a13d7914
debugging is a skill published in the GitHub repository MereWhiplash/engram-cogitator (4 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 705 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
debug-optimize-lcp
Guides debugging and optimizing Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) using Chrome DevTools MCP tools. Use this skill whenever the user asks about LCP performance, slow page loads, Core Web Vitals optimization, or wants to understand why their page's main content takes too long to appear. Also use when the user mentions…
systematic-debugging
Use when debugging a failing test, build error, or runtime issue that isn't immediately obvious. Guides a 4-phase root cause analysis instead of random fix attempts.
log-error-digest
Analyze log files to troubleshoot errors, identify peak error periods, and produce error clustering, frequency statistics, and time distribution reports. Supports JSON, syslog, and Nginx formats with automatic detection. Use when a user uploads a .log file and asks to analyze errors, find patterns, debug issues, or…
deck-retro
Run a fully local agent-deck retrospective over the user's own transcripts, Recall index and logs. Use when a user wants to find recurring failures or take their own finding from investigation through synthetic reproduction, a user-filed issue, a test-first fix and contributor PR handoff. Also use for weekly usage…
incident-response-incident-response
Coordinate production incident triage, mitigation, investigation, recovery, and follow-up. Use when responding to outages or other incidents that require structured operational coordination.
cwv-optimizer
Diagnose and fix Core Web Vitals issues on AEM Edge Delivery Services pages. Goes deeper than generic CWV advice by understanding EDS-specific performance patterns including the 100KB LCP budget, E-L-D loading phases, block rendering behavior, and third-party script impact. Produces specific fixes for LCP, CLS, and…