parallel-debugging

Name: parallel-debugging
Author: wshobson

7.5kinstalls4.1kforks

How to install parallel-debugging?

wshobson/agents/parallel-debugging

$npx -y skills add wshobson/agents --skill parallel-debugging

Installs into the current project.

Summary

parallel-debugging is an agent skill published from wshobson/agents, installable through the skills CLI.

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Parallel Debugging
2
3	Framework for debugging complex issues using the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) methodology with parallel agent investigation.
4
5	## When to Use This Skill
6
7	- Bug has multiple plausible root causes
8	- Initial debugging attempts haven't identified the issue
9	- Issue spans multiple modules or components
10	- Need systematic root cause analysis with evidence
11	- Want to avoid confirmation bias in debugging
12
13	## Hypothesis Generation Framework
14
15	Generate hypotheses across 6 failure mode categories:
16
17	### 1. Logic Error
18
19	- Incorrect conditional logic (wrong operator, missing case)
20	- Off-by-one errors in loops or array access
21	- Missing edge case handling
22	- Incorrect algorithm implementation
23
24	### 2. Data Issue
25
26	- Invalid or unexpected input data
27	- Type mismatch or coercion error
28	- Null/undefined/None where value expected
29	- Encoding or serialization problem
30	- Data truncation or overflow
31
32	### 3. State Problem
33
34	- Race condition between concurrent operations
35	- Stale cache returning outdated data
36	- Incorrect initialization or default values
37	- Unintended mutation of shared state
38	- State machine transition error
39
40	### 4. Integration Failure
41
42	- API contract violation (request/response mismatch)
43	- Version incompatibility between components
44	- Configuration mismatch between environments
45	- Missing or incorrect environment variables
46	- Network timeout or connection failure
47
48	### 5. Resource Issue
49
50	- Memory leak causing gradual degradation
51	- Connection pool exhaustion
52	- File descriptor or handle leak
53	- Disk space or quota exceeded
54	- CPU saturation from inefficient processing
55
56	### 6. Environment
57
58	- Missing runtime dependency
59	- Wrong library or framework version
60	- Platform-specific behavior difference
61	- Permission or access control issue
62	- Timezone or locale-related behavior
63
64	## Evidence Collection Standards
65
66	### What Constitutes Evidence
67
68	\| Evidence Type \| Strength \| Example \|
69	\| ----------------- \| -------- \| --------------------------------------------------------------- \|
70	\| Direct \| Strong \| Code at `file.ts:42` shows `if (x > 0)` should be `if (x >= 0)` \|
71	\| Correlational \| Medium \| Error rate increased after commit `abc123` \|
72	\| Testimonial \| Weak \| "It works on my machine" \|
73	\| Absence \| Variable \| No null check found in the code path \|
74
75	### Citation Format
76
77	Always cite evidence with file:line references:
78
79	```
80	Evidence: The validation function at `src/validators/user.ts:87`
81	does not check for empty strings, only null/undefined. This allows
82	empty email addresses to pass validation.
83	```
84
85	### Confidence Levels
86
87	\| Level \| Criteria \|
88	\| ------------------- \| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \|
89	\| High (>80%) \| Multiple direct evidence pieces, clear causal chain, no contradicting evidence \|
90	\| Medium (50-80%) \| Some direct evidence, plausible causal chain, minor ambiguities \|
91	\| Low (<50%) \| Mostly correlational evidence, incomplete causal chain, some contradicting evidence \|
92
93	## Result Arbitration Protocol
94
95	After all investigators report:
96
97	### Step 1: Categorize Results
98
99	- Confirmed: High confidence, strong evidence, clear causal chain
100	- Plausible: Medium confidence, some evidence, reasonable causal chain
101	- Falsified: Evidence contradicts the hypothesis
102	- Inconclusive: Insufficient evidence to confirm or falsify
103
104	### Step 2: Compare Confirmed Hypotheses
105
106	If multiple hypotheses are confirmed, rank by:
107
108	1. Confidence level
109	2. Number of supporting evidence pieces
110	3. Strength of causal chain
111	4. Absence of contradicting evidence
112
113	### Step 3: Determine Root Cause
114
115	- If one hypothesis clearly dominates: declare as root cause
116	- If multiple hypotheses are equally likely: may be compound issue (multiple contributing causes)
117	- If no hypotheses confirmed: generate new hypotheses based on evidence gathered
118
119	### Step 4: Validate Fix
120
121	Before declaring the bug fixed:
122
123	- [ ] Fix addresses the identified root cause
124	- [ ] Fix doesn't introduce new issues
125	- [ ] Original reproduction case no longer fails
126	- [ ] Related edge cases are covered
127	- [ ] Relevant tests are added or updated

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type

azure-diagnosticsDebug Azure production issues on Azure using AppLens, Azure Monitor, resource health, and safe triage. WHEN: debug production issues, troubleshoot app service, app service high CPU, app service deploySkillsJul 2026472k1.3k
systematic-debuggingUse when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixesSkillsJul 2026197k259k
safe-debugRigor Debug / Rigor Audit skill for deep learning research work. Use when the user pastes a traceback, terminal error, CUDA OOM, checkpoint load failure, shape mismatch, NaN loss symptom, or training SkillsMay 2026161k507
explore-runRigor Improve / Rigor Explore run leaf skill for bounded exploratory evidence in deep learning research repositories. Use when the researcher explicitly authorizes exploratory runs such as small-subseSkillsMay 2026161k507
minimal-run-and-auditRigor Run skill for README-first deep learning repo reproduction. Use when the task is specifically to capture or normalize evidence from the selected smoke test or documented inference or evaluation SkillsMay 2026161k507
insforge-debugUse when diagnosing problems in an InsForge project — reactive failures (SDK error object, HTTP 4xx/5xx, gateway timeout 502/503/504, edge function failure or timeout, login/OAuth/auth errors, RLS denSkillsJul 202618k31

parallel-debugging

7.5kinstalls4.1kforks

View on GitHub

How to install parallel-debugging?

wshobson/agents/parallel-debugging

$npx -y skills add wshobson/agents --skill parallel-debugging

Installs into the current project.

Summary

parallel-debugging is an agent skill published from wshobson/agents, installable through the skills CLI.

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Parallel Debugging
2
3	Framework for debugging complex issues using the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) methodology with parallel agent investigation.
4
5	## When to Use This Skill
6
7	- Bug has multiple plausible root causes
8	- Initial debugging attempts haven't identified the issue
9	- Issue spans multiple modules or components
10	- Need systematic root cause analysis with evidence
11	- Want to avoid confirmation bias in debugging
12
13	## Hypothesis Generation Framework
14
15	Generate hypotheses across 6 failure mode categories:
16
17	### 1. Logic Error
18
19	- Incorrect conditional logic (wrong operator, missing case)
20	- Off-by-one errors in loops or array access
21	- Missing edge case handling
22	- Incorrect algorithm implementation
23
24	### 2. Data Issue
25
26	- Invalid or unexpected input data
27	- Type mismatch or coercion error
28	- Null/undefined/None where value expected
29	- Encoding or serialization problem
30	- Data truncation or overflow
31
32	### 3. State Problem
33
34	- Race condition between concurrent operations
35	- Stale cache returning outdated data
36	- Incorrect initialization or default values
37	- Unintended mutation of shared state
38	- State machine transition error
39
40	### 4. Integration Failure
41
42	- API contract violation (request/response mismatch)
43	- Version incompatibility between components
44	- Configuration mismatch between environments
45	- Missing or incorrect environment variables
46	- Network timeout or connection failure
47
48	### 5. Resource Issue
49
50	- Memory leak causing gradual degradation
51	- Connection pool exhaustion
52	- File descriptor or handle leak
53	- Disk space or quota exceeded
54	- CPU saturation from inefficient processing
55
56	### 6. Environment
57
58	- Missing runtime dependency
59	- Wrong library or framework version
60	- Platform-specific behavior difference
61	- Permission or access control issue
62	- Timezone or locale-related behavior
63
64	## Evidence Collection Standards
65
66	### What Constitutes Evidence
67
68	\| Evidence Type \| Strength \| Example \|
69	\| ----------------- \| -------- \| --------------------------------------------------------------- \|
70	\| Direct \| Strong \| Code at `file.ts:42` shows `if (x > 0)` should be `if (x >= 0)` \|
71	\| Correlational \| Medium \| Error rate increased after commit `abc123` \|
72	\| Testimonial \| Weak \| "It works on my machine" \|
73	\| Absence \| Variable \| No null check found in the code path \|
74
75	### Citation Format
76
77	Always cite evidence with file:line references:
78
79	```
80	Evidence: The validation function at `src/validators/user.ts:87`
81	does not check for empty strings, only null/undefined. This allows
82	empty email addresses to pass validation.
83	```
84
85	### Confidence Levels
86
87	\| Level \| Criteria \|
88	\| ------------------- \| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \|
89	\| High (>80%) \| Multiple direct evidence pieces, clear causal chain, no contradicting evidence \|
90	\| Medium (50-80%) \| Some direct evidence, plausible causal chain, minor ambiguities \|
91	\| Low (<50%) \| Mostly correlational evidence, incomplete causal chain, some contradicting evidence \|
92
93	## Result Arbitration Protocol
94
95	After all investigators report:
96
97	### Step 1: Categorize Results
98
99	- Confirmed: High confidence, strong evidence, clear causal chain
100	- Plausible: Medium confidence, some evidence, reasonable causal chain
101	- Falsified: Evidence contradicts the hypothesis
102	- Inconclusive: Insufficient evidence to confirm or falsify
103
104	### Step 2: Compare Confirmed Hypotheses
105
106	If multiple hypotheses are confirmed, rank by:
107
108	1. Confidence level
109	2. Number of supporting evidence pieces
110	3. Strength of causal chain
111	4. Absence of contradicting evidence
112
113	### Step 3: Determine Root Cause
114
115	- If one hypothesis clearly dominates: declare as root cause
116	- If multiple hypotheses are equally likely: may be compound issue (multiple contributing causes)
117	- If no hypotheses confirmed: generate new hypotheses based on evidence gathered
118
119	### Step 4: Validate Fix
120
121	Before declaring the bug fixed:
122
123	- [ ] Fix addresses the identified root cause
124	- [ ] Fix doesn't introduce new issues
125	- [ ] Original reproduction case no longer fails
126	- [ ] Related edge cases are covered
127	- [ ] Relevant tests are added or updated

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type