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 samibs/skillfoundry --skill debuggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/samibs/skillfoundryWrote 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/samibs/skillfoundry/debug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/samibs/skillfoundry/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/samibs/skillfoundry/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/samibs/skillfoundry/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/samibs/skillfoundry/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 | $0.00007 | $0.00591 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00236 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00118 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00059 |
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 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 — 82 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Debug — Interactive Debugger
Role: Launch and control an interactive debug session for a file, test, or running process.
Usage
/debug <file> Start debug session, paused at entry
/debug <file>:<line> Start session with breakpoint at line
/debug test <test-file> Debug a test file using its test runner
Examples
/debug src/auth/login.ts
/debug src/utils/parser.ts:42
/debug test src/auth/__tests__/login.test.ts
Behavior
When invoked, follow this sequence:
1. Start Session
- Parse the argument to extract file path and optional line number.
- If prefixed with
test, detect the test runner (jest, vitest, pytest, mocha) from project config. - Call
debug_startwith the resolved file, runtime, and test_command if applicable. - Confirm the session started and report the paused location.
2. Set Initial Breakpoint (if line specified)
- If the user provided
<file>:<line>, calldebug_breakpointwith actionsetat that line. - Then call
debug_stepwith actioncontinueto run to the breakpoint. - Report the paused location and surrounding code context.
3. Guide Inspection
- Once paused, call
debug_inspectwith targetscopeto show local variables. - Call
debug_inspectwith targetcallstackto show the call stack. - Present findings and ask the user what to investigate next.
4. Interactive Loop
Respond to user instructions by mapping them to debug tools:
| User says | Tool call |
|---|---|
| "step" / "next" | debug_step action=next |
| "step into" | debug_step action=into |
| "step out" | debug_step action=out |
| "continue" | debug_step action=continue |
| "inspect X" | debug_inspect target=X |
| "eval " | debug_evaluate expression=expr |
| "break :" | debug_breakpoint action=set |
| "breakpoints" | debug_breakpoint action=list |
| "stop" / "quit" | debug_stop |
5. Cleanup
- Always call
debug_stopwhen the user is done or the process exits. - Report any uncaught exceptions with full stack trace and variable context.
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 · 82 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A 9b421b0166a2
debug is a skill published in the GitHub repository samibs/skillfoundry (12 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 591 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
systemic-issue-triage
Trigger: new issue, bug report, triage, backlog, issue flood, community report, root cause, dead-end, blocked user. Attack issues by root class, never one-by-one; fixes must shrink the system, not grow it.
issue-root-resolution
Trigger: root audit, atacar la raíz, issue roots, backlog roots, mechanism map, deletion-driven fix, resolver issues de raíz, close outdated issues. Audit and resolve issue clusters by verified root cause.
rdd-defect-workflow
Trigger: RDD, receipt-driven development, review authority, receipt/lineage, correction/recovery, delivery gate/kill switch, bounded review defects. Guide work.
roam
Codebase comprehension via roam-code CLI. Use when exploring codebases, planning modifications, debugging failures, assessing PR risk, or checking architecture health. Triggers on: understanding project structure, pre-change safety checks, finding symbols/files, blast radius analysis, affected tests, health scoring…
ring:searching-code
Forensic code search and analysis with optional Chain of Draft (CoD) ultra-concise mode. Five-phase methodology (clarification, planning, execution, analysis, synthesis) with severity assessment. Use for targeted investigation of specific patterns, bugs, or vulnerabilities. Skip for broad architecture mapping (use…
memorix-troubleshooting
Use when Memorix MCP, setup, project binding, HTTP control plane, hooks, skills, or agent integration is missing, stale, or failing.