fix
Diagnose and fix bugs with root-cause analysis and verification. Use when you have a concrete issue report, failing behavior, runtime error, or test regression that should be resolved safely. Stop and escalate to brainstorm when scope or risk grows.
What this skill does
# Fix ## Scope Gate (Required Before Starting) Use this skill only when all conditions below are true: 1. **Concrete issue signal exists** - Clear failing behavior, error, or regression is identified - Enough evidence exists to begin diagnosis (logs, stack trace, failing test, or reproducible steps) 2. **Likely localized fix path** - Issue appears constrained to a small area - No expected cross-system redesign or migration 3. **Low-to-moderate architectural risk** - Fix can be made without foundational changes - No phased rollout/feature-flag strategy is expected 4. **Straightforward verification path** - Reproduction and post-fix checks can be run in practical scope - Success criteria can be validated directly If any condition fails, escalate to `brainstorm` or `write-plan`. ## Hard Stop Escalation Criteria Immediately stop and switch to planning if any of these occur: - Root cause remains unclear after focused investigation - Fix requires cross-cutting architectural or data-model changes - Scope expands into large refactor or multi-module migration - Security/compliance-sensitive behavior is involved - Verification reveals broad regressions requiring phased mitigation - Multiple fix attempts fail without converging on a root cause Escalation action: 1. Stop all implementation activities. 2. Output the exact message: "This fix exceeds safe single-pass debugging limits. Ask, Recommend `brainstorm` or `write-plan` first to define phased diagnosis, implementation, and risk controls." ## Workflow ### Step 1: Intake and Contextualize 1. Understand the reported bug and define explicit expected behavior. 2. Collect/confirm minimum bug report fields: - Title - Expected behavior - Actual behavior - Reproduction steps - Evidence (logs, trace, screenshot, failing test output) - Environment (branch/OS/runtime/version if relevant) - Impact/severity 3. Load only the project context relevant to the bug: - If `docs/SUMMARY.md` exists, read it first. - Load only task-relevant detail docs. - Prioritize `Code Standard` docs for implementation conventions. - If docs conflict with code or user intent, use the available input/question tool before broad changes. ### Step 2: Reproduce and Diagnose 1. Reproduce the issue consistently. 2. Locate the failure point (file/function/line range/subsystem). 3. Trace control/data flow to identify the **root cause**. 4. Form a fix hypothesis and confirm it explains observed behavior. Guidelines: - Read surrounding code, not only the failing line. - Prefer root-cause correction over symptom patching. - Add temporary diagnostics only when needed; remove them after use. ### Step 3: Decide Small vs Bigger Fix Classify the work before coding: #### Small fix (continue in this skill) Most are true: - Root cause is clear and validated - Change surface is narrow (typically a few files) - Regression risk is limited and testable quickly #### Bigger/risky fix (escalate to `brainstorm` or `write-plan`) Any are true: - Root cause is uncertain - Multiple subsystems must change together - Requires migration, rollout sequencing, or broad refactor - Risk cannot be reasonably controlled in a single pass If it is a bigger fix, follow **Hard Stop Escalation Criteria**. ### Step 4: Implement (Small Fix Path) 1. State a brief 1-3 bullet implementation plan. 2. Apply the smallest targeted change that resolves the root cause. 3. Keep scope strict; avoid unrelated refactors. 4. Add/update regression tests when applicable. ### Step 5: Verify Run validation in increasing scope: 1. Focused checks for the changed behavior/module 2. Nearby regression checks 3. Relevant project checks (lint/typecheck/tests/build) as needed Fix is complete only when: - Reproduction no longer fails - Expected behavior is confirmed - No critical regressions are introduced If verification indicates broader impact, escalate to `brainstorm` or `write-plan`. ### Step 6: Complete and Report Provide a concise completion report with: - **Root cause** - **What changed** - **Why this fix works** - **Verification performed and results** - **Residual risks / follow-ups** If behavior or documentation-relevant rules changed, update the minimal relevant docs. If architecture changed, this should have been escalated. ## Rules - Do not guess when key context is missing. - Always prioritize root-cause fixes. - Keep blast radius minimal. - Do not mark done without verification. - Escalate early when scope/risk exceeds this skill. ## Optional Bug Report Template Use when the report is incomplete: - Title: - Expected behavior: - Actual behavior: - Reproduction steps: - Error logs/stack trace: - Environment: - Impact/severity: - Additional context:
Related in Code Review
gstack
IncludedFast headless browser for QA testing and site dogfooding. Navigate pages, interact with elements, verify state, diff before/after, take annotated screenshots, test responsive layouts, forms, uploads, dialogs, and capture bug evidence. Use when asked to open or test a site, verify a deployment, dogfood a user flow, or file a bug with screenshots. (gstack)
startup-due-diligence
IncludedLegal due diligence review for seed-stage and Series A startups (US, Delaware C-Corp focus). Supports both investor and founder perspectives. Capabilities include: (1) Interactive document review and issue spotting; (2) Document request list generation; (3) Cap table and SAFE/convertible note analysis; (4) Red flag identification with severity ratings; (5) Diligence report generation. TRIGGERS: due diligence, DD, startup investment, cap table review, Series A, seed round, investor diligence, legal review startup, SAFE analysis, convertible note, 409A, founder vesting.
interview-master
IncludedThis skill should be used when the user asks to "generate interview questions", "prepare for interview", "optimize resume", "conduct mock interview", "analyze git commits for resume", "generate resume from code", "review my resume", or mentions interview preparation, career assistance, or extracting project experience from git history. Provides comprehensive interview and career development guidance for both job seekers and interviewers.
fix-issue
IncludedFixes GitHub issues using parallel analysis agents for root cause investigation, code exploration, and regression detection. Reads issue context from gh CLI, searches codebase and memory for related patterns, generates a fix with tests, and links the resolution back to the issue via PR. Includes prevention analysis to avoid recurrence. Use when debugging errors, resolving regressions, fixing bugs, or triaging issues.
sf-apex
IncludedGenerates and reviews Salesforce Apex code with 150-point scoring. TRIGGER when: user writes, reviews, or fixes Apex classes, triggers, test classes, batch/queueable/schedulable jobs, or touches .cls/.trigger files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: LWC JavaScript (use sf-lwc), Flow XML (use sf-flow), SOQL-only queries (use sf-soql), or non-Salesforce code.
swift-development
IncludedComprehensive Swift development for building, testing, and deploying iOS/macOS applications. Use when Claude needs to: (1) Build Swift packages or Xcode projects from command line, (2) Run tests with XCTest or Swift Testing framework, (3) Manage iOS simulators with simctl, (4) Handle code signing, provisioning profiles, and app distribution, (5) Format or lint Swift code with SwiftFormat/SwiftLint, (6) Work with Swift Package Manager (SPM), (7) Implement Swift 6 concurrency patterns (async/await, actors, Sendable), (8) Create SwiftUI views with MVVM architecture, (9) Set up Core Data or SwiftData persistence, or any other Swift/iOS/macOS development tasks.