packages/core/src/methodology/packs/collaboration/parallel-investigation/SKILL.md
Coordinates parallel investigation threads to simultaneously explore multiple hypotheses or root causes across different system areas. Use when debugging production incidents, slow API performance, multi-system integration failures, or complex bugs where the root cause is unclear and multiple plausible theories exist; when serial troubleshooting is too slow; or when multiple investigators can divide root-cause analysis work. Provides structured phases for problem decomposition, thread assignment, sync points with Continue/Pivot/Converge decisions, and final report synthesis.
npx skillsauth add rohitg00/skillkit parallel-investigationInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Coordinate parallel investigation threads to explore multiple hypotheses simultaneously. Most effective for production incidents, performance regressions, or integration failures where the root cause is unclear.
When uncertain, explore multiple paths in parallel. Converge when evidence points to an answer.
Parallel investigation reduces time-to-solution by eliminating serial bottlenecks.
Break the problem into independent investigation threads:
Problem: API responses are slow
Investigation Threads:
├── Thread A: Database performance
│ └── Check slow queries, indexes, connection pool
├── Thread B: Application code
│ └── Profile endpoint handlers, check for N+1
├── Thread C: Infrastructure
│ └── Check CPU, memory, network latency
└── Thread D: External services
└── Check third-party API response times
Each thread should be independent (no blocking dependencies), focused (clear scope), and time-boxed.
Assign threads with clear ownership:
## Thread A: Database Performance
**Investigator:** [Name/Agent A]
**Duration:** 30 minutes
**Scope:**
- Query execution times
- Index utilization
- Connection pool metrics
**Report Format:** Summary + evidence
Each thread follows this pattern:
Thread Log Template:
## Thread: [Name]
**Start:** [Time]
### Findings
- [Timestamp] [Finding]
### Evidence
- [Log/Metric/Screenshot]
### Preliminary Conclusion
[What this thread suggests about the problem]
Regular convergence to share findings:
Sync Point Agenda:
1. Each thread report (2 min each)
2. Discussion & correlation (5 min)
3. Decision: Continue, Pivot, or Converge (3 min)
Sync Point Decisions:
When a thread identifies the likely cause:
Hub and Spoke: One coordinator assigns threads, tracks progress, calls sync points, and makes convergence decisions. Best when one person has the most context.
Peer Network: Equal investigators post findings to a shared channel and self-organize convergence when a pattern emerges. Best when investigators have similar expertise.
[Thread A] [Status] Starting query analysis
[Thread B] [Finding] No N+1 patterns in user endpoint
[Thread A] [Finding] Slow query: SELECT * FROM orders WHERE...
[Thread C] [Dead End] CPU and memory within normal
[Thread A] [Hot Lead] Missing index on orders.user_id
## Thread A Summary
**Status:** Hot Lead
**Key Finding:** Missing index on orders.user_id
**Evidence:** Query taking 3.2s, explain shows full table scan
**Recommendation:** Likely root cause — suggest converge
| Thread Status | Action | |---------------|--------| | All exploring | Continue parallel | | One hot lead | Validate lead, others support | | Multiple leads | Prioritize by evidence strength | | All dead ends | Reframe problem, new threads | | Confirmed cause | Converge, begin fix |
A typical two-hour investigation:
0:00 Problem decomposition & thread assignment
0:15 Parallel investigation begins
0:45 Sync point #1 → Continue/Pivot/Converge decision
1:30 Sync point #2 (if continuing)
1:35 Final convergence & documentation
Adjust sync point cadence based on incident severity — every 20 minutes for critical outages, every 45 minutes for lower-urgency investigations.
# Investigation: [Problem]
## Summary
[Brief description and resolution]
## Threads Explored
### Thread A: [Area]
- Investigator: [Name]
- Findings: [Summary]
- Outcome: [Lead / Dead End / Root Cause]
## Root Cause
[Detailed explanation of what was found]
## Evidence
- [Evidence 1]
- [Evidence 2]
## Resolution
[What was done to fix]
## Lessons Learned
- [Learning 1]
tools
Discovers, searches, and installs skills from multiple AI agent skill marketplaces (400K+ skills) using the SkillKit CLI. Supports browsing official partner collections (Anthropic, Vercel, Supabase, Stripe, and more) and community repositories, searching by domain or technology, and installing specific skills from GitHub. Use when the user wants to find, browse, or install new agent skills, plugins, extensions, or add-ons; asks 'is there a skill for X' or 'find a skill for X'; wants to explore a skill store or marketplace; needs to extend agent capabilities in areas like React, testing, DevOps, security, or APIs; or says 'browse skills', 'search skill marketplace', 'install a skill', or 'what skills are available'.
development
Applies proven testing patterns — Arrange-Act-Assert (AAA), Given-When-Then, Test Data Builders, Object Mother, parameterized tests, fixtures, spies, and test doubles — to help write maintainable, reliable, and readable test suites. Use when the user asks about writing unit tests, integration tests, or end-to-end tests; structuring test cases or test suites; applying TDD or BDD practices; working with mocks, stubs, spies, or fakes; improving test coverage or reducing flakiness; or needs guidance on test organization, naming conventions, or assertions in frameworks like Jest, Vitest, pytest, or similar.
development
Guides the red-green-refactor TDD workflow: write a failing test first, implement the minimum code to make it pass, then refactor while keeping tests green. Use when a user asks to practice TDD, write tests first, follow red-green-refactor, do test-driven development, write failing tests before code, or phrases like 'make the test pass', 'test coverage', or 'unit tests before implementation'.
development
Reviews test code to identify and fix common testing anti-patterns including flaky tests, over-mocking, brittle assertions, test interdependency, and hidden test logic. Flags bad patterns, explains the specific defect, and provides corrected implementations. Use when reviewing test code, debugging intermittent or unreliable test failures, or when the user mentions flaky tests, test smells, brittle tests, test isolation issues, mock overuse, slow tests, or test maintenance problems.