CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

debug-helper

Systematic debugging strategies, troubleshooting methodologies, and problem-solving techniques for code and system issues. Use when the user encounters bugs, errors, or unexpected behavior and needs help diagnosing and resolving problems.

56

Quality

64%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./claude/skills/debug-helper/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

50%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

An actionable but bloated reference catalog: strong on concrete commands yet weak on token efficiency, with a monolithic structure that should be split into reference files rather than inlining material Claude largely already knows.

Suggestions

Trim or remove explanations of well-known concepts (rubber duck debugging, binary search method, basic shell/network commands) and keep only non-obvious or project-specific guidance.

Split the language-specific tools, shell/system debugging, and performance debugging catalogs into separate reference files (e.g. references/shell-debugging.md) linked from a concise SKILL.md overview.

Convert the methodology's implicit question lists into explicit validation gates with feedback loops (e.g. 'After each hypothesis test: if reproduction stops, record the cause; if not, return to step 3').

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The 258-line body re-explains concepts Claude already knows (rubber duck debugging, binary search method, basic shell commands like ping/nslookup/htop and git bisect) and pads obvious bullets, so it is noticeably verbose despite being organized.

2 / 5

Actionability

Provides numerous concrete, executable commands and code snippets (gdb, strace, cProfile, traceback.print_stack) covering common cases; minor gaps remain where sections are just lists of questions rather than actions.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The five-step Debugging Methodology gives a clear sequence and includes 'Verify each fix' / 'Confirm the fix works', but checkpoints are mostly implicit questions rather than explicit validation gates with feedback loops.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Has reasonable section headers, but everything is inlined into a single 258-line file with no references to separate files, so content that belongs in references (language-specific tools, shell/system debugging catalogs) is not split out.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

78%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong description with explicit what/when structure and natural trigger phrasing; its main weakness is relying on abstract nouns ('strategies, methodologies, techniques') rather than concrete, verb-led actions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('debugging strategies, troubleshooting methodologies... for code and system issues') and offers two actions ('diagnosing and resolving problems'), but the first sentence is abstract nouns rather than concrete operations, so it does not reach the comprehensive-action level of 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers 'what' (debugging/troubleshooting strategies and techniques) and 'when' ('Use when the user encounters bugs, errors, or unexpected behavior and needs help diagnosing and resolving problems') with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural user phrasing ('encounters bugs, errors, or unexpected behavior') which a user would plausibly say; coverage is good though a few synonyms (e.g. 'crash', 'stack trace', 'exception') are missing, keeping it below 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Debugging is a fairly distinct niche with clear triggers, but the broad 'problem-solving techniques for code and system issues' phrasing creates minor overlap risk with general coding-assistant skills.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
einverne/dotfiles
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.