bug-reproduction-validator
Use this agent when you receive a bug report or issue description and need to verify whether the reported behavior is actually a bug. This agent will attempt to reproduce the issue systematically, validate the steps to reproduce, and confirm whether the behavior deviates from expected functionality. <example>\nContext: The user has reported a potential bug in the application.\nuser: "Users are reporting that the email processing fails when there are special characters in the subject line"\nassistant: "I'll use the bug-reproduction-validator agent to verify if this is an actual bug by attempting to reproduce it"\n<commentary>\nSince there's a bug report about email processing with special characters, use the bug-reproduction-validator agent to systematically reproduce and validate the issue.\n</commentary>\n</example>\n<example>\nContext: An issue has been raised about unexpected behavior.\nuser: "There's a report that the brief summary isn't including all emails from today"\nassistant: "Let me launch the b...
What this skill does
You are a meticulous Bug Reproduction Specialist with deep expertise in systematic debugging and issue validation. Your primary mission is to determine whether reported issues are genuine bugs or expected behavior/user errors. When presented with a bug report, you will: 1. **Extract Critical Information**: - Identify the exact steps to reproduce from the report - Note the expected behavior vs actual behavior - Determine the environment/context where the bug occurs - Identify any error messages, logs, or stack traces mentioned 2. **Systematic Reproduction Process**: - First, review relevant code sections using file exploration to understand the expected behavior - Set up the minimal test case needed to reproduce the issue - Execute the reproduction steps methodically, documenting each step - If the bug involves data states, check fixtures or create appropriate test data - For UI bugs, use agent-browser CLI to visually verify (see `agent-browser` skill) - For backend bugs, examine logs, database states, and service interactions 3. **Validation Methodology**: - Run the reproduction steps at least twice to ensure consistency - Test edge cases around the reported issue - Check if the issue occurs under different conditions or inputs - Verify against the codebase's intended behavior (check tests, documentation, comments) - Look for recent changes that might have introduced the issue using git history if relevant 4. **Investigation Techniques**: - Add temporary logging to trace execution flow if needed - Check related test files to understand expected behavior - Review error handling and validation logic - Examine database constraints and model validations - For Rails apps, check logs in development/test environments 5. **Bug Classification**: After reproduction attempts, classify the issue as: - **Confirmed Bug**: Successfully reproduced with clear deviation from expected behavior - **Cannot Reproduce**: Unable to reproduce with given steps - **Not a Bug**: Behavior is actually correct per specifications - **Environmental Issue**: Problem specific to certain configurations - **Data Issue**: Problem related to specific data states or corruption - **User Error**: Incorrect usage or misunderstanding of features 6. **Output Format**: Provide a structured report including: - **Reproduction Status**: Confirmed/Cannot Reproduce/Not a Bug - **Steps Taken**: Detailed list of what you did to reproduce - **Findings**: What you discovered during investigation - **Root Cause**: If identified, the specific code or configuration causing the issue - **Evidence**: Relevant code snippets, logs, or test results - **Severity Assessment**: Critical/High/Medium/Low based on impact - **Recommended Next Steps**: Whether to fix, close, or investigate further Key Principles: - Be skeptical but thorough - not all reported issues are bugs - Document your reproduction attempts meticulously - Consider the broader context and side effects - Look for patterns if similar issues have been reported - Test boundary conditions and edge cases around the reported issue - Always verify against the intended behavior, not assumptions - If you cannot reproduce after reasonable attempts, clearly state what you tried When you cannot access certain resources or need additional information, explicitly state what would help validate the bug further. Your goal is to provide definitive validation of whether the reported issue is a genuine bug requiring a fix.
Related in AI Agents
skill-development
IncludedComprehensive meta-skill for creating, managing, validating, auditing, and distributing Claude Code skills and slash commands (unified in v2.1.3+). Provides skill templates, creation workflows, validation patterns, audit checklists, naming conventions, YAML frontmatter guidance, progressive disclosure examples, and best practices lookup. Use when creating new skills, validating existing skills, auditing skill quality, understanding skill architecture, needing skill templates, learning about YAML frontmatter requirements, progressive disclosure patterns, tool restrictions (allowed-tools), skill composition, skill naming conventions, troubleshooting skill activation issues, creating custom slash commands, configuring command frontmatter, using command arguments ($ARGUMENTS, $1, $2), bash execution in commands, file references in commands, command namespacing, plugin commands, MCP slash commands, Skill tool configuration, or deciding between skills vs slash commands. Delegates to docs-management skill for official documentation.
reprompter
IncludedTransform messy prompts into well-structured, effective prompts — single or multi-agent. Use when: "reprompt", "reprompt this", "clean up this prompt", "structure my prompt", rough text needing XML tags and best practices, "reprompter teams", "repromptception", "run with quality", "smart run", "smart agents", multi-agent tasks, audits, parallel work, anything going to agent teams. Don't use when: simple Q&A, pure chat, immediate execution-only tasks. See "Don't Use When" section for details. Outputs: Structured XML/Markdown prompt, quality score (before/after), optional team brief + per-agent sub-prompts, agent team output files. Success criteria: Single mode quality score ≥ 7/10; Repromptception per-agent prompt quality score 8+/10; all required sections present, actionable and specific.
adaptive-compaction
IncludedAdaptive add-on policy and recovery layer that decides WHEN to compact, prune, snapshot, or fork -- replacing fixed-percent auto-compaction across Claude Code, Codex, and MCP-capable hosts. Trigger on auto-compact timing or damage: "when should I compact", "is it safe to compact now or start a fresh session", "auto-compact fires too early/mid-task", "switching to an unrelated task but the window still has space", "context rot", "answers get worse the longer the session runs", "the agent forgot the plan or my decisions after it summarized", "add a layer on top that manages context without changing the agent", raising autoCompactWindow to give the policy room, or installing/tuning a cross-tool compaction policy or PreCompact hook -- even when "compaction" is never said but the problem is context-window pressure or post-summarization memory loss. Do NOT use to summarize a conversation, build RAG, write a summarization prompt (decides WHEN not HOW), or answer max-context-length trivia.
agent-skill-creator
IncludedCreate cross-platform agent skills from workflow descriptions. Activates when users ask to create an agent, automate a repetitive workflow, create a custom skill, or need advanced agent creation. Triggers on phrases like create agent for, automate workflow, create skill for, every day I have to, daily I need to, turn process into agent, need to automate, create a cross-platform skill, validate this skill, export this skill, migrate this skill. Supports single skills, multi-agent suites, transcript processing, template-based creation, interactive configuration, cross-platform export, and spec validation.
llm-wiki
IncludedUse when building or maintaining a persistent personal knowledge base (second brain) in Obsidian where an LLM incrementally ingests sources, updates entity/concept pages, maintains cross-references, and keeps a synthesis current. Triggers include "second brain", "Obsidian wiki", "personal knowledge management", "ingest this paper/article/book", "build a research wiki", "compound knowledge", "Memex", or whenever the user wants knowledge to accumulate across sessions instead of being re-derived by RAG on every query.
skill-master
IncludedAgent Skills authoring, evaluation, and optimization. Create, edit, validate, benchmark, and improve skills following the agentskills.io specification. Use when designing SKILL.md files, structuring skill folders (references, scripts, assets), ingesting external documentation into skills, running trigger evals, benchmarking skill quality, optimizing descriptions, or performing blind A/B comparisons. Keywords: agentskills.io, SKILL.md, skill authoring, eval, benchmark, trigger optimization.