Bugfix
Use when a bug is reported, something is broken, an error or crash needs fixing, a wrong output appears, or a regression shows up — guides Grimoire's Reproduce → Root-Cause → failing-test-FIRST → Fix → Verify discipline and will not let the fix begin until a failing regression test is recorded. Use also when the user says "bugfix", "/bugfix", "fix this bug", or "something is broken".From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add grimoire-rs/grimoire --skill bugfixAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- 7 stars7 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
- runs commandsInstructs the agent to run 3 commands, including `task rust:verify` and 2 more.
SKILL.md
5.9 KB, ~1.4k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
/bugfix — Guided Bug-Fix Workflow
Guard rail for the #1 bug-fix failure: fixing before a failing test exists.
This skill walks workflow-bugfix.md (the
single source of truth) and adds one hard, non-skippable gate — Phase 3 must
produce a test that fails on the current code before any fix is written.
Why this exists: the rule alone was repeatedly skipped. This skill makes the order explicit and the gate blocking. Read
workflow-bugfix.mdfor the full rationale; this file is the executable checklist.
The non-negotiable sequence
Reproduce → Root-Cause Analysis → FAILING TEST → Fix → Verify → Review → Commit
Each phase finishes before the next starts. The only way past Phase 3 is a test that you have run and watched fail for the right reason.
Phase 1 — Reproduce (no guessing)
- State the exact wrong behavior: command, input, observed vs expected.
- Find the surface: which entry point(s)? CLI command, TUI path, library seam? A bug often lives on more than one surface (e.g. a CLI path AND its TUI twin); list every one that shares the broken code.
- Confirm it actually reproduces. If you can't reproduce it, keep digging — no speculative fixes.
Write a one-line repro: "<cmd/inputs> → <observed>; expected <expected>".
Phase 2 — Root-Cause Analysis (write it down)
-
Trace the symptom to the line and the condition that made it fire.
-
Output a root-cause statement in this exact shape — no "error on line N":
X happens because Y, introduced by/located at Z.
-
Single bug or a pattern? Grep for the same defect elsewhere (sibling call sites, the other surface from Phase 1). If it's a pattern, the fix covers all instances.
-
If the real cause needs an architectural change, stop and escalate to the feature workflow with a plan artifact — don't paper over it.
Phase 3 — Failing test FIRST 🚧 GATE
Do not edit any production code until this phase is done.
- Write the test that exercises the Phase-1 repro and targets the Phase-2 root
cause (not just the symptom).
- Acceptance-level →
test/tests/test_*.py(real binary + registry). - Unit-level → inline
#[cfg(test)]in the affected module.
- Acceptance-level →
- Run it. Paste the red output. It must fail, and fail for the bug's reason (assertion on the wrong behavior) — not a compile error, typo, or missing fixture.
- If an existing test encodes the buggy behavior (it asserts the wrong thing the user is now reporting), that test is part of the bug — note it; it will be corrected in the fix, with the reason recorded.
Gate to pass Phase 3 — all three true:
- A test exists that exercises the repro.
- You ran it and it failed (output shown).
- The failure is the bug, not test scaffolding.
If you cannot make a test fail, you have not reproduced or understood the bug — return to Phase 1/2. Skipping this gate is the failure mode this skill prevents.
Phase 4 — Fix (minimal, root-cause)
- Smallest change that addresses the Phase-2 cause. No drive-by refactor, no "while I'm here" cleanup (separate commit, separate type).
- Fix every instance the Phase-2 pattern search found.
- Correct any existing test that encoded the wrong behavior — state why in the diff/commit (user intent / corrected contract supersedes the old assumption).
Phase 5 — Verify (evidence, not vibes)
- The Phase-3 test now passes (show it).
- Run the subsystem gate for the changed area (e.g.
task rust:verify), then cache-bust + re-run unit tests if Rust (touchthe edited files so a stale cache can't mask a failure). - Manually confirm the Phase-1 repro no longer reproduces.
- Final gate before commit:
task --force verify(fmt + clippy + build + unit + acceptance). Verify it yourself — do not trust "should pass".
Phase 6 — Review-Fix Loop (+ optional Codex)
Apply the canonical Review-Fix Loop from workflow-bugfix.md (correctness vs
root cause, regression risk to other callers, minimality, test adequacy). For a
non-trivial fix, run one Codex adversarial pass over the diff as the cross-model
gate; fix real findings, re-verify, then converge.
Phase 7 — Commit
fix:conventional commit; body names the root cause and the regression test.- Reference the issue (
fixes #N) when one exists. - Never push — the human decides (see
workflow-git.md).
Anti-rationalizations (stop if you think these)
| Thought | Reality | Do this |
|---|---|---|
| "I know the cause, I'll just fix it." | No Phase-2 statement written. | Write the root-cause line first. |
| "The test is trivial, I'll add it after." | A test added after the fix never proved it caught the bug. | Write it first, watch it fail. |
| "Existing tests cover this area." | They may encode the buggy behavior. | Add a test for the exact broken path. |
| "Clippy/format nit nearby, I'll fix too." | Scope creep. | Separate chore:/refactor: commit. |
References
workflow-bugfix.md— full workflow + gates (source of truth)workflow-intent.md— work-type routingquality-core.md— verification honesty, review checklistworkflow-git.md—fix:commits, never push
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.