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 agentmods add skills/starrycod/cogitum/systematic-debuggingnpx skills add StarryCod/cogitum --skill systematic-debugginggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/StarryCod/cogitumWrote 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/starrycod/cogitum/systematic-debugging)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/starrycod/cogitum/systematic-debugging"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/starrycod/cogitum/systematic-debugging.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 | $0.00016 | $0.02462 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.01231 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00492 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00246 |
Grade A, and why
systematic-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 yesterday.
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.
This is a copy
97% identical to systematic-debugging — 18 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 368 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Systematic Debugging
Overview
Random fixes waste time and create new bugs. Quick patches mask underlying issues.
Core principle: ALWAYS find root cause before attempting fixes. Symptom fixes are failure.
Violating the letter of this process is violating the spirit of debugging.
The Iron Law
NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST
If you haven't completed Phase 1, you cannot propose fixes.
When to Use
Use for ANY technical issue:
- Test failures
- Bugs in production
- Unexpected behavior
- Performance problems
- Build failures
- Integration issues
Use this ESPECIALLY when:
- Under time pressure (emergencies make guessing tempting)
- "Just one quick fix" seems obvious
- You've already tried multiple fixes
- Previous fix didn't work
- You don't fully understand the issue
Don't skip when:
- Issue seems simple (simple bugs have root causes too)
- You're in a hurry (rushing guarantees rework)
- Someone wants it fixed NOW (systematic is faster than thrashing)
The Four Phases
You MUST complete each phase before proceeding to the next.
Phase 1: Root Cause Investigation
BEFORE attempting ANY fix:
1. Read Error Messages Carefully
- Don't skip past errors or warnings
- They often contain the exact solution
- Read stack traces completely
- Note line numbers, file paths, error codes
Action: Use read_file on the relevant source files. Use search_files to find the error string in the codebase.
2. Reproduce Consistently
- Can you trigger it reliably?
- What are the exact steps?
- Does it happen every time?
- If not reproducible → gather more data, don't guess
Action: Use the terminal tool to run the failing test or trigger the bug:
# Run specific failing test
pytest tests/test_module.py::test_name -v
# Run with verbose output
pytest tests/test_module.py -v --tb=long
3. Check Recent Changes
- What changed that could cause this?
- Git diff, recent commits
- New dependencies, config changes
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.
- yesterday First seen · 368 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 8e4ae531e79a
systematic-debugging is a skill published in the GitHub repository StarryCod/cogitum (11 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 2,462 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to systematic-debugging, differing in 18 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
文档协作
引导用户通过结构化的文档共同编写工作流程。当用户想撰写文档、提案、技术规范、决策文档或类似结构化内容时使用。该工作流程帮助用户高效传递上下文，通过迭代优化内容，并验证文档对读者有效。当用户提到写文档、创建提案、起草规范或类似文档任务时触发。.
openmaic-classroom
将 RAG 检索结果、文档块或知识图谱概念转换为 OpenMAIC 互动课程。当用户要求将知识库内容、检索到的文档片段、上传的文档、或知识图谱中的概念批量转换为教学课件/互动课堂时使用此技能。支持纯需求生成、基于 PDF 内容的课程生成、和基于概念图遍历的批量课堂生成。.
weknora-shared
Use when driving a WeKnora RAG server through the weknora CLI as an agent — authenticating, managing knowledge bases / documents / sessions / agents, running search or chat, or interpreting the CLI's JSON envelopes and exit codes. Read this before any other weknora- skill.
weknora-rag-search
Use when retrieving from or asking questions against a WeKnora knowledge base via the weknora CLI — and especially when unsure whether to use chat, session ask, or search chunks for a given goal.
数据处理器
数据处理与分析技能。当用户需要对知识库检索结果进行数据分析、统计计算、格式转换、数据提取或生成报告时使用此技能。支持 Python 脚本执行进行高级数据处理。.
文档分析器
深度分析文档结构和内容。当用户需要分析文档结构、提取关键信息、识别文档类型、进行内容质量评估、或理解文档组织方式时使用此技能。.