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 MichaelYcJo/SpecSeal --skill debuggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MichaelYcJo/SpecSealWrote 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/michaelycjo/specseal/debug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/michaelycjo/specseal/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/michaelycjo/specseal/debug/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/michaelycjo/specseal/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/michaelycjo/specseal/debug.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 | $0.00077 | $0.00439 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.00176 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00088 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
debug 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 7d 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.
What it actually says
debug, one hypothesis at a time, and a failing test before the fix
The code runs and produces the wrong answer, which means it can be reproduced. A bug that cannot be reproduced cannot be claimed fixed. Changing several things at once destroys the only signal there is: which change mattered.
Phase 1: Understand (before touching code)
- Read the FULL error message and stack trace
- Reproduce the issue (write a failing test if possible)
- Check recent changes that might have caused it
- Collect evidence: logs, error output, state
Phase 2: Locate
- Find working examples of similar code in the codebase
- Compare working and broken code: what is different?
- Binary search: narrow down the problem area
- Check inputs and outputs at each boundary
Phase 3: Hypothesize
- Form ONE hypothesis at a time
- Design a minimal test to confirm or deny it
- If it is denied, form a new hypothesis (don't patch the old one)
Phase 4: Fix
- Write a failing test that reproduces the bug
- Make the minimal change to fix it
- Verify: failing test now passes
- Verify: no other tests broke
Rules
- Never guess-and-check randomly. Be systematic.
- One change at a time. Verify after each.
- If three fix attempts fail, STOP (the 3+ Fix Rule). The problem may be architectural.
- Document what was tried and what was learned.
Output Format
Bug: [description]
Root cause: [why it happens]
Fix: [what was changed]
Test: [how it's verified]
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.
- 7d ago Changed d7e35534587f
- 2mo ago First seen · 55 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 582acdb244ae
debug is a skill published in the GitHub repository MichaelYcJo/SpecSeal (1 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 439 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
audit
Project health audit and health check — architecture, performance, tests, dependencies, code quality. Use when assessing overall project health, before releases, or after refactors.
roslyn-query
Query .NET/C# codebases using Roslyn AST analysis via dotnet run file. Use for tracing data flow, auditing API usage, finding pattern violations, or ad-hoc codebase queries.
anti-patterns
Catalogue of known SDLC anti-patterns that greatcto agents must actively reject when reviewing architecture, plans, code, or post-mortems. Used by architect (pre-impl), pm (planning), senior-dev (impl), l3-support (post-incident).
skeptical-triage
Reusable 3-round self-challenge + arbiter pattern for filtering false positives from findings/verdicts. Use when the cost of a false-positive gate block exceeds the cost of 4 extra LLM turns.
shipyard-debugging
Investigates root cause systematically before any fix is proposed. Use when encountering any bug, test failure, unexpected behavior, or error message. Also use for tracebacks, exceptions, "not working" complaints, build failures, performance problems, or integration issues, and whenever the next step would be to…
codebase-hygiene
Two-mode skill: (1) find semantic duplicates — functions doing the same thing under different names, invisible to copy-paste detectors; (2) deepen shallow modules — thin wrappers and pass-through layers that spread complexity. Advisory and read-only; changes route through BUILD with full gates.