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 mthines/agent-skills --skill fix-buggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mthines/agent-skillsWrote 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/mthines/agent-skills/fix-bug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mthines/agent-skills/fix-bug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mthines/agent-skills/fix-bug.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 5.1 | $0.00343 | $0.12526 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00171 | $0.06263 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00069 | $0.02505 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00034 | $0.01253 |
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 4d 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 — 872 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Fix Bug
Take a bug — described in any form the user has at hand — and either ship a verified draft PR
with the fix or hand back a clear, evidence-backed proposal. This skill is a thin
orchestrator: heavy reasoning lives in holistic-analysis (dispatched isolated via the
rca-investigator agent on the complex lane), gating in confidence, test
authoring in /tdd / /e2e-testing / /e2e-testing-mobile, plan authoring in aw-planner
(standard-lane) or aw-create-plan (fast-lane), implementation in aw-executor, and independent
grading in bug-fix-verifier. This skill owns input classification, complexity triage,
evidence assembly, the user-facing decision at the confidence boundary, lane selection, and
a durable bug-notes ledger that survives compaction.
Source of truth. This
SKILL.mdis a thin index. Detailed procedures live inrules/*.md, literal artefacts intemplates/*.md, and external references inreferences/*.md. Load only what the current phase asks for.
Architecture
Phase 0: Intake → classify input + infer bugClass + detect mode flags
Phase 0.5: Complexity Triage → simple | complex (signals + decision rule)
Phase 1: Evidence Resolution → per-input resolution + pre-flight sweep (may upgrade triage)
Phase 2: Source Mapping + Repro Lock → Evidence Record + failing repro (via /tdd or /e2e-testing*)
Phase 3: Analysis → Task(rca-investigator) — isolated holistic-analysis + confidence [complex]
OR lightweight in-skill analysis [simple]
Phase 4: Confidence Gate → /confidence analysis
Phase 5: Branch Decision → >= 92 % auto-implement (no human confirmation);
80–91 % stop with raise-the-score guidance,
force-proceed offered (routes standard-lane);
70–79 % stop, force-proceed flagged NOT recommended;
< 70 % stop, no force-proceed.
--analyse-only always stops here.
Phase 6: Autonomous Handoff (lane-split)
├── Fast-lane (simple + >= 92 %):
│ /fix-bug → Skill("aw-create-plan", ...) → aw-executor
│ Round-3 CEGIS failure → fall back to standard-lane via aw-planner.
└── Standard-lane (complex / downgrade / force-proceed):
aw-planner → aw-executor (canonical path).
Phase 7: Independent Verification → bug-fix-verifier (fresh context) decides PR undraft
Identical for both lanes.
Phase 8: Telemetry Verification → poll originating Dash0 query post-deploy (telemetry inputs)
What ships with it
14 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.
- references/research-sources.md 9.3 KB
- rules/autonomous-handoff.md 12 KB
- rules/bug-notes-ledger.md 5.5 KB
- rules/complexity-triage.md 10 KB
- rules/diagnostic-surface.md 27 KB
- rules/evidence-resolution.md 6.9 KB
- rules/fast-lane-plan-contract.md 17 KB
- rules/independent-verification.md 4.6 KB
- rules/preflight.md 4.7 KB
- rules/reproduction.md 15 KB
- rules/self-improvement-loop.md 14 KB
- rules/telemetry-verification.md 11 KB
- templates/bug-fix-pack.md 2.3 KB
- templates/bug-notes.md 3.5 KB
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 872 lines · 343 tokens per session scan A ad1ec0fdf0e6
fix-bug is a skill published in the GitHub repository mthines/agent-skills (12 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 343 tokens to every session and 12,526 once invoked, about $0.0017 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
testing-dags
Complex DAG testing workflows with debugging and fixing cycles. Use for multi-step testing requests like "test this dag and fix it if it fails", "test and debug", "run the pipeline and troubleshoot issues". For simple test requests ("test dag", "run dag"), the airflow entrypoint skill handles it directly. This skill…
experiment-iterative-coder
Iterative code refinement through plan → code → evaluate → refine cycles. Runs lint checks (ruff), tests (pytest), and structured self-evaluation each cycle, then diagnoses failures and refines. Decomposes complex tasks into sequential phases, iterates up to 3 times per phase (10 total). Use when: the main agent…
testing-blocks
Use this when you have made AEM Edge Delivery Services code changes to blocks, scripts, or styles and need to validate them before opening a pull request. Covers unit testing for utilities and logic, browser testing with Playwright, linting, and guidance on what to test and how.
qa
Read-only automated QA sweep of a deployed stardust site on AEM Edge Delivery Services — validates routing, content fidelity vs the source capture, template conformance, rendered integrity (geometry, JS errors, broken images), visual regression vs baselines, metadata/SEO/JSON-LD, link integrity, accessibility (axe)…
refactoring-patterns
Systematic refactoring techniques, code smell elimination, pattern extraction, and legacy modernization.
run-checks
Run the project's full verification gate: every check the project defines as a pass/fail condition, built from its CI config, check scripts, and configured tools, or from a formatter-linter-test baseline when it declares none. Use when the user asks to "run checks", "run the verification gate", "run lint and tests"…