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 shennawardana23/skillme --skill debuggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/shennawardana23/skillmeWrote 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/shennawardana23/skillme/debug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/shennawardana23/skillme/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shennawardana23/skillme/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/shennawardana23/skillme/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shennawardana23/skillme/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 | $0.00094 | $0.01156 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00038 | $0.00462 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00231 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00116 |
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 — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Debug
Iron law
Do not guess. Do not apply a fix until you understand the root cause. Every fix must follow from evidence. "It might be X" is not sufficient — "evidence Y proves it is X" is.
Phase 1: reproduce
Establish a minimal reproduction before doing anything else:
- What exact input or action triggers the issue?
- What is the expected outcome? What is the actual outcome (exact error message, full stack trace)?
- Is it deterministic or intermittent?
- When did it start? What changed?
If you cannot reproduce it, you cannot fix it with confidence.
Phase 2: isolate
Narrow down the location:
- Binary search — which layer does the failure originate in?
- Remove variables — disable features, mock dependencies one at a time.
- Check inputs — is the problem in the data, not the code?
- Check environment — does it fail in prod but not dev, and why specifically?
For Go: check whether go test -race reveals it; add log.Printf("[DEBUG] state=%v", state) at layer boundaries; use dlv (Delve) for interactive stepping when a print-based binary search stalls.
Phase 3: diagnose
Identify the root cause with evidence: trace the execution path from input to failure; check every assumption (types, nil-ness, ordering, timing); for panics, read the stack trace top-to-bottom — the root cause is usually the deepest frame, not the one at the top where the panic surfaced.
Phase 4: fix
- Fix the root cause, not a symptom.
- Write a test that would have caught this bug — it should fail without the fix and pass with it.
- Check whether the same bug pattern exists in similar code elsewhere in the codebase.
- Update documentation if the behavior was wrong but previously undocumented as correct.
Common Go patterns
| Symptom | Likely cause | Check |
|---|---|---|
| nil pointer dereference | Unguarded pointer use | Add a nil check before dereference |
| goroutine leak | Missing stop signal | Add a context.Context or done channel |
| data race | Concurrent map/slice mutation | Add a mutex, or use sync.Map |
context deadline exceeded |
Missing timeout propagation | Pass ctx into every blocking call on the path |
| unexpected log output | Wrong logger instance | Check which logger got wired at construction |
| test flakiness | Time-dependent assertion | Use an eventually/poll pattern instead of a fixed sleep |
What ships with it
5 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 92 lines · 94 tokens per session scan A d88f133777af
debug is a skill published in the GitHub repository shennawardana23/skillme (3 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 94 tokens to every session and 1,156 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
diagnosing-superpowers
Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor results, a skill that didn't fire, "it took too long", "why is it so expensive", "what is it doing" — or wants to build a bug report for the superpowers maintainers, for the current session…
ego-lite-simplify
Find and implement evidence-backed simplifications in the ego-lite repository. Use when reviewing the codebase for dead code, duplicated state or APIs, speculative abstractions, unnecessary compatibility layers, hand-written infrastructure, excessive tests or documentation, or when the user asks to reduce code size or…
fix-bug
Resolves one bug from any evidence (Dash0 link, stack trace, error, file:line, screen recording, Linear ticket, or symptom): triages complexity, locks a failing repro, runs root-cause analysis, and at confidence >= 92 % hands off to a verified draft PR via the fast or standard lane. Flags --analyse-only…
measurable
Ensures every delivery ships the telemetry that proves its impact and surfaces its regressions — RUM events, OpenTelemetry traces, metrics, logs, and explicit error paths; modes guide, implement, audit, setup. Triggers on "is this measurable", "add telemetry", "instrument this endpoint", "will we know if this…
playwright-trace-analyzer
Analyzes Playwright trace.zip archives (or a GitHub Actions run URL) — action timeline, network, console errors — to name the race behind a flake and rank test or app fixes by measured impact. Invoke with /playwright-trace-analyzer for "why is this test flaky" or "why did playwright time out".