复制下面这句话，粘贴给 Claude Code、Codex、Cursor 等 AI 编程工具，它会读取安装说明并在你确认后完成安装。
请阅读 https://ai.atlankj.com/install/asset/gh-systematic-debugging-b2d41e60b061 ，按照其中的说明把「systematic-debugging」安装到你（当前 AI 工具）中。执行前先告诉我将运行的命令和写入的位置，等我确认。
查看 AI 将读取的安装说明正在读取 GitHub 原文…
内容来自 GitHub 原始文件，由原作者维护。在 GitHub 查看
Random fixes waste time and create new bugs. Quick patches mask underlying issues.
Core principle: ALWAYS find root cause before attempting fixes. Symptom fixes are failure.
Violating the letter of this process is violating the spirit of debugging.
NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST
If you haven't completed Phase 1, you cannot propose fixes.
The feedback loop is the debugging work. Before reading code to build a theory, create or identify a tight command that can go red on the user's exact symptom and green when the bug is fixed. A tight loop is fast, deterministic, agent-runnable, and specific enough to catch this bug — not merely "doesn't crash".
When a clean repro is hard, spend disproportionate effort building the loop. Guessing without a red-capable loop is the failure mode this skill exists to prevent.
Use for ANY technical issue:
Use this ESPECIALLY when:
Don't skip when:
You MUST complete each phase before proceeding to the next.
BEFORE attempting ANY fix:
Action: Use read_file on the relevant source files. Use search_files to find the error string in the codebase.
Ways to construct a loop — try in roughly this order:
git bisect run when the bug appeared between two known states.Tighten the loop once it exists:
For non-deterministic bugs, the immediate goal is a higher reproduction rate, not perfection. Run the trigger 100x, parallelize, add stress, narrow timing windows, or inject sleeps. A 50% flake is debuggable; a 1% flake usually is not.
Action: Use the terminal tool to run the tight loop:
# Run a specific failing test
pytest tests/test_module.py::test_name -v
# Or run a scripted repro
python scripts/repro_bug.py
# Or run a high-repetition flaky repro
for i in {1..100}; do pytest tests/test_flake.py::test_name -q || break; done
Action:
# Recent commits
git log --oneline -10
# Uncommitted changes
git diff
# Changes in specific file
git log -p --follow src/problematic_file.py | head -100
WHEN system has multiple components (API → service → database, CI → build → deploy):
BEFORE proposing fixes, add diagnostic instrumentation:
For EACH component boundary:
Run once to gather evidence showing WHERE it breaks. THEN analyze evidence to identify the failing component. THEN investigate that specific component.
WHEN error is deep in the call stack:
Action: Use search_files to trace references:
# Find where the function is called
search_files("function_name(", path="src/", file_glob="*.py")
# Find where the variable is set
search_files("variable_name\\s*=", path="src/", file_glob="*.py")
STOP: Do not proceed to Phase 2 until you understand WHY it's happening.
Find the pattern before fixing:
Once the loop is red, shrink the repro to the smallest scenario that still goes red. Cut inputs, callers, config, data, and steps one at a time, re-running the loop after each cut. Keep only what is load-bearing for the failure.
Done when removing any remaining element makes the loop go green. A minimal repro narrows the hypothesis space and often becomes the cleanest regression test.
Action: Use search_files to find comparable patterns:
search_files("similar_pattern", path="src/", file_glob="*.py")
Scientific method:
If the user is present, show the ranked list before testing. They may have domain knowledge that instantly re-ranks it. If the user is AFK, proceed with your ranking.
[DEBUG-a4f2] so cleanup is a single search.Fix the root cause, not the symptom:
test-driven-development skill# Run the specific regression test
pytest tests/test_module.py::test_regression -v
# Run full suite — no regressions
pytest tests/ -q
Pattern indicating an architectural problem:
STOP and question fundamentals:
Discuss with the user before attempting more fixes.
This is NOT a failed hypothesis — this is a wrong architecture.
If you catch yourself thinking:
ALL of these mean: STOP. Return to Phase 1.
If 3+ fixes failed: Question the architecture (Phase 4 step 5).
| Excuse | Reality |
|---|---|
| "Issue is simple, don't need process" | Simple issues have root causes too. Process is fast for simple bugs. |
| "Emergency, no time for process" | Systematic debugging is FASTER than guess-and-check thrashing. |
| "Just try this first, then investigate" | First fix sets the pattern. Do it right from the start. |
| "I'll write test after confirming fix works" | Untested fixes don't stick. Test first proves it. |
| "Multiple fixes at once saves time" | Can't isolate what worked. Causes new bugs. |
| "Reference too long, I'll adapt the pattern" | Partial understanding guarantees bugs. Read it completely. |
| "I see the problem, let me fix it" | Seeing symptoms ≠ understanding root cause. |
| "One more fix attempt" (after 2+ failures) | 3+ failures = architectural problem. Question the pattern, don't fix again. |
| Phase | Key Activities | Success Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Root Cause | Read errors, reproduce, check changes, gather evidence, trace data flow | Understand WHAT and WHY |
| 2. Pattern | Find working examples, compare, identify differences | Know what's different |
| 3. Hypothesis | Form theory, test minimally, one variable at a time | Confirmed or new hypothesis |
| 4. Implementation | Create regression test, fix root cause, verify | Bug resolved, all tests pass |
Use these Hermes tools during Phase 1:
search_files — Find error strings, trace function calls, locate patternsread_file — Read source code with line numbers for precise analysisterminal — Run tests, check git history, reproduce bugsweb_search/web_extract — Research error messages, library docsFor complex multi-component debugging, dispatch investigation subagents:
delegate_task(
goal="Investigate why [specific test/behavior] fails",
context="""
Follow systematic-debugging skill:
1. Read the error message carefully
2. Reproduce the issue
3. Trace the data flow to find root cause
4. Report findings — do NOT fix yet
Error: [paste full error]
File: [path to failing code]
Test command: [exact command]
""",
toolsets=['terminal', 'file']
)
When fixing bugs:
From debugging sessions:
No shortcuts. No guessing. Systematic always wins.