debug-error
Advanced debugging system with Serena MCP integration for intelligent codebase analysis and error resolution
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:sc30gsw/claude-code-customes --skill debug-error54
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
32%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
The description identifies a debugging domain with a specific tool integration but remains too abstract and lacks actionable trigger guidance. It fails to specify concrete debugging actions and omits a 'Use when...' clause, making it difficult for Claude to know when to select this skill over general coding assistance.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms like 'debug', 'fix bug', 'error', 'crash', 'exception', 'troubleshoot'
List specific concrete actions such as 'analyze stack traces', 'identify root causes', 'trace code execution', 'resolve runtime errors'
Clarify what makes Serena MCP integration unique and when users would specifically need this tool versus general debugging help
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain ('debugging', 'codebase analysis', 'error resolution') and mentions a specific integration ('Serena MCP'), but lacks concrete actions like 'set breakpoints', 'trace stack traces', or 'analyze logs'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does at a high level but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant terms ('debugging', 'error resolution', 'codebase analysis') but misses common user phrases like 'bug', 'fix error', 'crash', 'exception', or 'troubleshoot'. 'Serena MCP' is technical jargon most users wouldn't naturally say. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'Serena MCP integration' provides some distinctiveness, but 'debugging' and 'codebase analysis' are broad terms that could overlap with general coding assistance or other debugging tools. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
50%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a structured debugging workflow with good awareness of Serena MCP tools, but lacks the concrete, executable examples needed for true actionability. The workflow is clear but missing validation checkpoints and error recovery paths. The content would benefit from specific input/output examples showing actual tool usage.
Suggestions
Add concrete examples showing actual Serena MCP tool calls with sample inputs and expected outputs (e.g., what does `mcp__serena__search_for_pattern` return and how to interpret it)
Include a feedback loop in the workflow: 'If hypothesis is wrong, return to step 5 with new evidence' or 'If pattern search returns no results, try broader search terms'
Add a worked example showing a complete debugging session from error to resolution using the described tools
Split detailed tool reference and examples into separate files, keeping SKILL.md as a quick-start overview
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient but includes some redundancy (e.g., 'Best Practices' section largely repeats workflow steps). The options table is useful but some descriptions are vague ('Enable deep Serena analysis' doesn't explain what that means). | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Lists specific MCP tool names which is helpful, but lacks executable examples. No concrete code showing how to actually use these tools, what their inputs/outputs look like, or example debugging sessions. 'Create minimal test case' and 'Document exact steps' are vague instructions. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 8-step sequence is provided, but lacks explicit validation checkpoints. No feedback loops for when debugging attempts fail. Missing guidance on what to do if pattern search returns nothing or if hypothesis is wrong. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is reasonably organized with clear sections, but everything is inline in one file. For a skill this comprehensive, detailed examples and tool reference documentation could be split into separate files. No references to external documentation. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- 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.