investigate
Systematic debugging skill for root cause investigation and resolution.
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..."
- matcher: "Edit"
hooks:
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:
-
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.
-
Check OMC state for active work:
state_get_status()If conflicting active tasks exist, warn the user before proceeding.
-
Detect current branch (for git-related skills):
git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo "not-a-git-repo" -
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. -
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 definitionslsp_find_references— find all callers/usages of a functionlsp_hover— get type information and documentationlsp_diagnostics— check for compiler/linter errors in affected filesast_grep_search— find structural code patterns across the codebase
- Collect symptoms: Error messages, stack traces, reproduction steps. If insufficient context, ask ONE question via AskUserQuestion.
- Read the code: Trace from symptom back to potential causes.
- Check recent changes:
git log --oneline -20 -- <affected-files> - 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:
- Write a minimal reproduction (test case, script, or command)
- Run it and confirm the failure
- 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:
- Add temporary log/assertion at suspected root cause. Run reproduction. Does evidence match?
- If hypothesis is wrong → return to Stage 1 with new data. Do NOT guess.
- 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
-
Log completion to daily log:
memory_daily_log(type: "done", entry: "{skill-name}: {brief result summary}") -
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} ) -
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
-
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.
-
Scope escalation: If fix/change touches 5+ files unexpectedly, pause and confirm with the user before proceeding.
-
Security uncertainty: If you are unsure about a security implication, STOP and escalate. Never guess on security.
-
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}
═══════════════════════════════════════