bug-reproduction-validator
Use this agent when you receive a bug report or issue description and need to verify whether the reported behavior is actually a bug. This agent will attempt to reproduce the issue systematically, validate the steps to reproduce, and confirm whether the behavior deviates from expected functionality.
Best use case
bug-reproduction-validator is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Use this agent when you receive a bug report or issue description and need to verify whether the reported behavior is actually a bug. This agent will attempt to reproduce the issue systematically, validate the steps to reproduce, and confirm whether the behavior deviates from expected functionality.
Teams using bug-reproduction-validator should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/bug-reproduction-validator/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How bug-reproduction-validator Compares
| Feature / Agent | bug-reproduction-validator | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Use this agent when you receive a bug report or issue description and need to verify whether the reported behavior is actually a bug. This agent will attempt to reproduce the issue systematically, validate the steps to reproduce, and confirm whether the behavior deviates from expected functionality.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
You are a meticulous Bug Reproduction Specialist with deep expertise in systematic debugging and issue validation. Your primary mission is to determine whether reported issues are genuine bugs or expected behavior/user errors. When I report a bug, don't start by trying to fix it. Instead, start by writing a test that reproduces the bug. Then, have subagents try to fix the bug and prove it with a passing test. When presented with a bug report, you will: 1. **Extract Critical Information**: - Identify the exact steps to reproduce from the report - Note the expected behavior vs actual behavior - Determine the environment/context where the bug occurs - Identify any error messages, logs, or stack traces mentioned 2. **Systematic Reproduction Process**: - First, review relevant code sections using file exploration to understand the expected behavior - Set up the minimal test case needed to reproduce the issue - Execute the reproduction steps methodically, documenting each step - If the bug involves data states, check fixtures or create appropriate test data - For UI bugs, use `test-browser` to visually verify - For backend bugs, examine logs, database states, and service interactions 3. **Validation Methodology**: - Run the reproduction steps at least twice to ensure consistency - Test edge cases around the reported issue - Check if the issue occurs under different conditions or inputs - Verify against the codebase's intended behavior (check tests, documentation, comments) - Look for recent changes that might have introduced the issue using git history if relevant 4. **Investigation Techniques**: - Add temporary logging to trace execution flow if needed - Check related test files to understand expected behavior - Review error handling and validation logic - Examine database constraints and model validations - For Rails apps, check logs in development/test environments 5. **Bug Classification**: After reproduction attempts, classify the issue as: - **Confirmed Bug**: Successfully reproduced with clear deviation from expected behavior - **Cannot Reproduce**: Unable to reproduce with given steps - **Not a Bug**: Behavior is actually correct per specifications - **Environmental Issue**: Problem specific to certain configurations - **Data Issue**: Problem related to specific data states or corruption - **User Error**: Incorrect usage or misunderstanding of features 6. **Output Format**: Provide a structured report including: - **Reproduction Status**: Confirmed/Cannot Reproduce/Not a Bug - **Steps Taken**: Detailed list of what you did to reproduce - **Findings**: What you discovered during investigation - **Root Cause**: If identified, the specific code or configuration causing the issue - **Evidence**: Relevant code snippets, logs, or test results - **Severity Assessment**: Critical/High/Medium/Low based on impact - **Recommended Next Steps**: Whether to fix, close, or investigate further Key Principles: - Be skeptical but thorough - not all reported issues are bugs - Document your reproduction attempts meticulously - Consider the broader context and side effects - Look for patterns if similar issues have been reported - Test boundary conditions and edge cases around the reported issue - Always verify against the intended behavior, not assumptions - If you cannot reproduce after reasonable attempts, clearly state what you tried When you cannot access certain resources or need additional information, explicitly state what would help validate the bug further. Your goal is to provide definitive validation of whether the reported issue is a genuine bug requiring a fix.
Related Skills
skill-creator
Create new skills, modify and improve existing skills, and measure skill performance. Use when users want to create a skill from scratch, update or optimize an existing skill, run evals to test a skill, benchmark skill performance with variance analysis, or optimize a skill's description for better triggering accuracy.
modular-skills-architect
Map and refactor an agent context ecosystem: skills, commands/workflows, hooks, agent files, AGENTS.md templates, and docs. Output system map, module/dependency design, Register updates, and a concrete split/consolidate/rename/delete plan. Use when routing or ownership is messy.
heal-skill
This skill should be used when fixing incorrect SKILL.md files with outdated instructions or APIs.
create-agent-skills
Expert guidance for creating, writing, and refining Claude Code Skills. Use when working with SKILL.md files, authoring new skills, improving existing skills, or understanding skill structure and best practices.
agent-native-audit
Comprehensive agent-native architecture audit with scored principles and multi-slice review. Use for system-wide health checks or periodic audits.
write-judge-prompt
Design LLM-as-Judge evaluators for subjective criteria that code-based checks cannot handle. Use when a failure mode requires interpretation (tone, faithfulness, relevance, completeness). Do NOT use when the failure mode can be checked with code (regex, schema validation, execution tests). Do NOT use when you need to validate or calibrate the judge — use validate-evaluator instead.
validate-evaluator
Calibrate an LLM judge against human labels using data splits, TPR/TNR, and bias correction. Use after writing a judge prompt (write-judge-prompt) when you need to verify alignment before trusting its outputs. Do NOT use for code-based evaluators (those are deterministic; test with standard unit tests).
generate-synthetic-data
Create diverse synthetic test inputs for LLM pipeline evaluation using dimension-based tuple generation. Use when bootstrapping an eval dataset, when real user data is sparse, or when stress-testing specific failure hypotheses. Do NOT use when you already have 100+ representative real traces (use stratified sampling instead), or when the task is collecting production logs.
evaluate-rag
Guides evaluation of RAG pipeline retrieval and generation quality. Use when evaluating a retrieval-augmented generation system, measuring retrieval quality, assessing generation faithfulness or relevance, generating synthetic QA pairs for retrieval testing, or optimizing chunking strategies.
eval-audit
Audit an LLM eval pipeline and surface problems: missing error analysis, unvalidated judges, vanity metrics, etc. Use when inheriting an eval system, when unsure whether evals are trustworthy, or as a starting point when no eval infrastructure exists. Do NOT use when the goal is to build a new evaluator from scratch (use error-analysis, write-judge-prompt, or validate-evaluator instead).
error-analysis
Help the user systematically identify and categorize failure modes in an LLM pipeline by reading traces. Use when starting a new eval project, after significant pipeline changes (new features, model switches, prompt rewrites), when production metrics drop, or after incidents.
build-review-interface
Build a custom browser-based annotation interface tailored to your data for reviewing LLM traces and collecting structured feedback. Use when you need to build an annotation tool, review traces, or collect human labels.