Kit4Some/skills/investigate

<!-- AUTO-GENERATED from SKILL.md.tmpl — do not edit directly. Run: node scripts/gen-skill-docs.mjs -->

---

name: investigate description: > Systematic debugging with root cause investigation. Six stages: investigate, reproduce, analyze, hypothesize, implement, verify. Iron Law: no fixes without root cause. Triggers on "디버깅", "버그 찾아", "investigate", "왜 안 돼", "debug", "find the bug", "root cause", "에러 분석". allowed-tools:

• Bash
• Read
• Write
• Edit
• Grep
• Glob
• Agent
• AskUserQuestion
• WebSearch hooks: PreToolUse:
  • matcher: "Edit" hooks:
    • type: command command: "bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../freeze/bin/check-freeze.sh" statusMessage: "Checking debug scope boundary..."
  • matcher: "Write" hooks:
    • type: command command: "bash ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../freeze/bin/check-freeze.sh" statusMessage: "Checking debug scope boundary..."

---

Investigate — Systematic Debugging

Iron Law

NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST.

Fixing symptoms creates whack-a-mole debugging. Find the root cause, then fix it.

Preamble

Before executing this skill:

1. Load context from memory:

   memory_search(query: "{skill-relevant-query}", associative: true, limit: 5)
   memory_search(tag: "{skill-name}", limit: 3)
   

   Review returned memories for relevant past context, decisions, and patterns.

2. Check OMC state for active work:

   state_get_status()
   

   If conflicting active tasks exist, warn the user before proceeding.

3. Detect current branch (for git-related skills):

   git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo "not-a-git-repo"
   

4. Check proactive mode:

   state_read("occ-proactive")
   

   If "false": do NOT proactively suggest other OpenClaw-CC skills during this session. Only run skills the user explicitly invokes.

5. Log skill activation:

   memory_daily_log(type: "note", entry: "Skill activated: /{skill-name}")
   

Memory Context Loading

Before starting work, load relevant context from the 3-layer memory system:

# Search for related past work
memory_search(query: "{task description}", associative: true, limit: 5)

# Search by relevant tags
memory_search(tag: "{relevant-tag}", limit: 3)

# Check for recent related daily logs
memory_search_date(start: "{7 days ago}", end: "{today}", category: "daily-logs", limit: 5)

Use retrieved context to:

• Avoid repeating past mistakes
• Build on previous decisions
• Maintain consistency with established patterns
• Reference related knowledge graph nodes

If critical related memories exist, summarize them before proceeding:

Found {N} related memories:
- {memory_1 title}: {brief relevance}
- {memory_2 title}: {brief relevance}

Check memory for related past bugs:

memory_search(query: "{error description}", tag: "bug")
memory_search(query: "{affected component}", tag: "debugging")

---

Stage 1 — Root Cause Investigation via OMC tracer

Delegate evidence gathering:

Agent(subagent_type: "oh-my-claudecode:tracer", prompt: "
  Investigate: {symptom_description}
  Gather evidence, trace code paths, form competing hypotheses.
  Do NOT fix anything. Output structured hypothesis report.
")

Use OMC code intelligence for precise tracing:

• lsp_goto_definition — trace symbols to their source definitions
• lsp_find_references — find all callers/usages of a function
• lsp_hover — get type information and documentation
• lsp_diagnostics — check for compiler/linter errors in affected files
• ast_grep_search — find structural code patterns across the codebase

1. Collect symptoms: Error messages, stack traces, reproduction steps. If insufficient context, ask ONE question via AskUserQuestion.
2. Read the code: Trace from symptom back to potential causes.
3. Check recent changes: git log --oneline -20 -- <affected-files>
4. Reproduce: Can you trigger the bug deterministically?

Output: "Root cause hypothesis: ..." — specific, testable claim.

---

Stage 1.5 — Reproduction (NEW)

Before forming hypotheses, reproduce the bug:

1. Write a minimal reproduction (test case, script, or command)
2. Run it and confirm the failure
3. If cannot reproduce → gather more evidence, do NOT proceed to fix

If reproduction succeeds, it becomes the regression test after the fix.

---

Stage 2 — Scope Lock

After forming root cause hypothesis, lock edits to the affected module:

FREEZE_CHECK="${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../freeze/bin/check-freeze.sh"
if [ -x "$FREEZE_CHECK" ]; then
  STATE_DIR="${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_DATA:-${HOME}/.omc/state}"
  mkdir -p "$STATE_DIR"
  echo "<detected-directory>/" > "$STATE_DIR/freeze-dir.txt"
  echo "Debug scope locked to: <detected-directory>/"
fi

Tell user: "Edits restricted to <dir>/ for this debug session. This prevents changes to unrelated code. Run /unfreeze to remove."

If bug spans entire repo or scope is unclear, skip lock and note why.

---

Stage 3 — Pattern Analysis

Check if bug matches known patterns:

| Pattern | Signature | Where to look | |---------|-----------|---------------| | Race condition | Intermittent, timing-dependent | Concurrent access to shared state | | Nil/null propagation | NoMethodError, TypeError | Missing guards on optional values | | State corruption | Inconsistent data, partial updates | Transactions, callbacks, hooks | | Integration failure | Timeout, unexpected response | External API calls, service boundaries | | Configuration drift | Works locally, fails elsewhere | Env vars, feature flags, DB state | | Stale cache | Shows old data, fixes on clear | Redis, CDN, browser cache |

External search (sanitize first — strip hostnames, IPs, paths, customer data):

• WebSearch: "{framework} {generic error type}"
• If unavailable, proceed with in-distribution knowledge

---

Stage 4 — Hypothesis Testing

Before writing ANY fix, verify your hypothesis:

1. Add temporary log/assertion at suspected root cause. Run reproduction. Does evidence match?
2. If hypothesis is wrong → return to Stage 1 with new data. Do NOT guess.
3. 3-strike rule: If 3 hypotheses fail, STOP. AskUserQuestion:

   3 hypotheses tested, none match. This may be an architectural issue rather than a simple bug.
   
   A) Continue investigating — new hypothesis: [describe]
   B) Escalate for human review — someone who knows the system
   C) Add logging and wait — instrument the area and catch it next time
   

Red flags — slow down if you see:

• "Quick fix for now" — there is no "for now." Fix it right or escalate.
• Proposing a fix before tracing data flow — you're guessing.
• Each fix reveals a new problem — wrong layer, not wrong code.

Log each hypothesis test result:

memory_store(category: "knowledge", subcategory: "debugging",
  title: "Investigation: {bug} - Hypothesis {N}",
  content: "{hypothesis, test method, result, verdict}",
  tags: ["investigation", "{component}"], importance: 5)

---

Stage 5 — Implementation via OMC executor (ONLY after root cause confirmed)

Agent(subagent_type: "oh-my-claudecode:executor", model: "opus", prompt: "
  Root cause confirmed: {root_cause}
  Implement fix: {description}
  Files: {file_list}
  Constraints: minimal diff, fix root cause not symptom
")

Safety limits:

• 5+ files → AskUserQuestion about blast radius
• 3 failed fix attempts → escalate

---

Stage 6 — Verification via OMC verifier

Agent(subagent_type: "oh-my-claudecode:verifier", prompt: "
  Verify fix for: {bug_description}
  Root cause: {root_cause}
  Fix: {fix_description}
  1. Confirm original symptom no longer reproduces
  2. Run test suite
  3. Check for regressions in related areas
")

Output structured debug report:

═══════════════════════════════════════
DEBUG REPORT
═══════════════════════════════════════
Symptom:         {what the user observed}
Root cause:      {what was actually wrong}
Fix:             {what was changed, with file:line references}
Evidence:        {test output, reproduction showing fix works}
Regression test: {file:line of the new test}
Related:         {past bugs in same area, architectural notes}
Status:          DONE | DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | BLOCKED
═══════════════════════════════════════

Memory Persistence

After completing the workflow, persist results to the 3-layer memory system:

Required Actions

1. Log completion to daily log:

   memory_daily_log(type: "done", entry: "{skill-name}: {brief result summary}")
   

2. Store significant findings (importance ≥ 6):

   memory_store(
     category: "{appropriate category}",
     title: "{descriptive title}",
     content: "{structured result content}",
     tags: ["{skill-name}", "{project}", "{relevant-tags}"],
     importance: {6-10 based on significance}
   )
   

3. Link to related memories (if applicable):

   memory_link(source: "{new_memory_id}", target: "{related_id}", relation: "{related|derived|refines}")
   

Category Routing

| Content Type | Category | Subcategory | |-------------|----------|-------------| | Bug fix / debugging | knowledge | debugging | | Code review results | projects | {project-name} | | Design decisions | projects | {project-name} | | Research findings | knowledge | {topic} | | Release / deploy | projects | {project-name} | | Person-related info | people | — | | Task / action item | tasks | — |

Messenger Notification

Send notifications for significant events via messenger:

When to Notify

| Event | Platform | Priority | |-------|----------|----------| | Task/pipeline completed | telegram | Normal | | Verification failed | telegram | High | | Long-running task done (10+ min) | telegram | Normal | | Critical error or blocker | telegram | High | | PR created / release shipped | all | Normal | | Importance ≥ 8 memory created | telegram | Normal |

Notification Format

messenger_send(
  platform: "telegram",
  message: "[{skill-name}] {status_emoji} {brief description}\n\n{details if relevant}"
)

Status Emojis:

• Completed successfully: ✅
• Completed with warnings: ⚠️
• Failed / blocked: ❌
• Needs attention: 🔔

Do NOT Notify

• Routine memory operations
• Intermediate progress steps
• Read-only operations (search, list, status)

Completion Status Protocol

Every skill must end with one of these status codes:

| Code | Meaning | When to Use | |------|---------|-------------| | DONE | All steps completed, evidence provided | Root cause found + fix verified, PR created, review finished | | DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | Completed with warnings or caveats | Tests pass but coverage dropped, fix applied but can't fully verify | | BLOCKED | Cannot proceed, requires user intervention | 3 failed attempts, missing permissions, external dependency down | | NEEDS_CONTEXT | Missing information to continue | Unclear requirements, need user clarification |

Escalation Rules

1. 3-strike rule: After 3 failed attempts at any step, STOP and escalate to user. Do not continue guessing. Present what was tried and ask for direction.

2. Scope escalation: If fix/change touches 5+ files unexpectedly, pause and confirm with the user before proceeding.

3. Security uncertainty: If you are unsure about a security implication, STOP and escalate. Never guess on security.

4. Verification requirement: Never claim DONE without evidence.

   • "Should work" → RUN IT. Confidence is not evidence.
   • "Already tested earlier" → Code changed since. Test again.
   • "Trivial change" → Trivial changes break production.

Output Format

═══════════════════════════════════════
Status: {DONE | DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | BLOCKED | NEEDS_CONTEXT}
Summary: {one-line description of outcome}
Evidence: {test output, verification results, or blocking reason}
═══════════════════════════════════════