AI Agent Hub
Back to skills
Advanced Bug Fixing Workflow icon

Advanced Bug Fixing Workflow

Development Updated 2026.08.29

Paste the following prompt into your AI chat to install this skill:

Please follow https://skillhub.cn/install/skillhub.md and install @user_458438e1/bug-fix-farming.

About this skill

What It Solves

Bug fixing often stalls between vague symptoms, ad-hoc guesses, and unconfirmed code changes. This skill turns defect repair into an inspectable engineering flow: build a bug card with symptoms, expected behavior, impact scope, and acceptance criteria, then proceed through minimal repro, root-cause analysis, repair, tests, and CodeReview. It fits online defects, regression issues, and post-CI-failure code investigation, especially when teams want reusable repair steps.

How It Works

The skill uses a step-file architecture, loading only the current step file to reduce context bloat. Its core principle is AI analyzes and proposes, while humans confirm and decide: AI must not bypass mandatory checkpoints to modify code. Key checkpoints include:
- CP1: confirm the repro script, test case, and run result match the reported bug.
- CP2: confirm candidate root causes, evidence chain, and final diagnosis direction.
- CP3: confirm the fix plan, including affected files, change approach, and risk assessment; if rejected, AI must provide at least two alternatives.
- CP4: confirm test coverage, edge cases, and run results.

Users can use y, r, or s to confirm, reject, or skip allowed steps; at CP3, p can trigger multi-perspective discussion and e can expand the fix scope. The final output is a fixed Bug Fix Report containing bug card, reproduction and root cause, fix and tests, review gate, and conclusion.

Boundaries

It is not for 'write a new feature,' generic code critique, or 'explain this module.' Execution forbids fixing before reproduction, treating a successful CI rerun as root-cause repair, or patching the same module repeatedly without global review. If a high-risk regression appears, prefer rollback and add regression tests first.

Use Cases

  • A production API intermittently returns 500; reproduce minimally, identify root cause, and produce a review-ready fix report.
  • CI fails and looks like a regression; decide whether code is defective, then run repair and test checkpoints.
  • A payment callback never fires; convert symptoms, expectations, and impact into a bug card before proceeding.
  • The proposed fix is challenged; require two alternative repair paths and wait for human confirmation.

Best For

  • Backend engineers responsible for production stability who need to drive 500s, timeouts, or regressions to closure.
  • Developers triaging CI failures who want to distinguish code defects from flakiness and add tests.
  • Tech leads reviewing junior or contractor changes who need auditable human checkpoints before edits.
  • Product engineers on payment or order risks who require reviewable and rollback-ready fix plans.