debugging
Root cause analysis and debugging protocols. Use when encountering errors, test failures, unexpected behavior, stack traces, or when code behaves differently than expected.
87
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
82%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a solid description with excellent trigger terms and complete structure including an explicit 'Use when' clause. The main weakness is the lack of specific concrete actions - it describes the category (debugging) but not the specific techniques or capabilities the skill provides. Some overlap risk exists with related coding/testing skills.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions like 'analyze stack traces, trace execution flow, isolate failing components, identify regression sources' to improve specificity
Consider adding more distinctive terms like 'breakpoint', 'logging', 'bisect', or specific debugging methodologies to reduce conflict risk with general coding skills
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain ('root cause analysis and debugging protocols') and implies actions, but doesn't list specific concrete actions like 'analyze stack traces', 'trace variable state', or 'isolate failing components'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Root cause analysis and debugging protocols') and when ('Use when encountering errors, test failures, unexpected behavior, stack traces, or when code behaves differently than expected') with explicit trigger guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'errors', 'test failures', 'unexpected behavior', 'stack traces', 'code behaves differently than expected' - these cover common debugging scenarios well. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While debugging is a clear domain, 'errors' and 'unexpected behavior' are broad terms that could overlap with error handling skills, testing skills, or general coding assistance skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured debugging skill with excellent organization and appropriate progressive disclosure. The content is concise and respects Claude's intelligence. The main weakness is the lack of concrete, executable examples - the guidance is procedural but abstract, which limits immediate actionability.
Suggestions
Add a concrete debugging example showing the process applied to a real error (e.g., a stack trace with step-by-step diagnosis)
Include specific debug logging code snippets rather than just describing where to add logging
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, avoiding explanations of concepts Claude already knows. Each section provides actionable guidance without padding or unnecessary context. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides structured guidance and clear steps, but lacks concrete executable examples. The debugging process is described abstractly rather than with specific code snippets or commands that could be copy-pasted. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-step debugging process is clearly sequenced with logical progression from capture to verification. The integration section provides explicit validation checkpoints (CI passes, tests pass) before committing. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with a concise overview and well-signaled one-level-deep references to detailed materials (root-cause-analysis.md, error-patterns.md, debugging-tools.md). Content is appropriately split between overview and reference files. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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.