reproduce-bug
This skill should be used when reproducing and investigating a bug using logs, console inspection, and browser screenshots.
Best use case
reproduce-bug is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
This skill should be used when reproducing and investigating a bug using logs, console inspection, and browser screenshots.
Teams using reproduce-bug 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/reproduce-bug/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How reproduce-bug Compares
| Feature / Agent | reproduce-bug | 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?
This skill should be used when reproducing and investigating a bug using logs, console inspection, and browser screenshots.
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
# Reproduce Bug Command
Look at github issue #$ARGUMENTS and read the issue description and comments.
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.
## Phase 1: Log Investigation
Run the following agents in parallel to investigate the bug:
1. Task rails-console-explorer(issue_description)
2. Task appsignal-log-investigator(issue_description)
Think about the places it could go wrong looking at the codebase. Look for logging output we can look for.
Run the agents again to find any logs that could help us reproduce the bug.
Keep running these agents until you have a good idea of what is going on.
## Phase 2: Visual Reproduction with Playwright
If the bug is UI-related or involves user flows, use Playwright to visually reproduce it:
### Step 1: Verify Server is Running
```
mcp__plugin_compound-engineering_pw__browser_navigate({ url: "http://localhost:3000" })
mcp__plugin_compound-engineering_pw__browser_snapshot({})
```
If server not running, inform user to start `bin/dev`.
### Step 2: Navigate to Affected Area
Based on the issue description, navigate to the relevant page:
```
mcp__plugin_compound-engineering_pw__browser_navigate({ url: "http://localhost:3000/[affected_route]" })
mcp__plugin_compound-engineering_pw__browser_snapshot({})
```
### Step 3: Capture Screenshots
Take screenshots at each step of reproducing the bug:
```
mcp__plugin_compound-engineering_pw__browser_take_screenshot({ filename: "bug-[issue]-step-1.png" })
```
### Step 4: Follow User Flow
Reproduce the exact steps from the issue:
1. **Read the issue's reproduction steps**
2. **Execute each step using Playwright:**
- `browser_click` for clicking elements
- `browser_type` for filling forms
- `browser_snapshot` to see the current state
- `browser_take_screenshot` to capture evidence
3. **Check for console errors:**
```
mcp__plugin_compound-engineering_pw__browser_console_messages({ level: "error" })
```
### Step 5: Capture Bug State
When you reproduce the bug:
1. Take a screenshot of the bug state
2. Capture console errors
3. Document the exact steps that triggered it
```
mcp__plugin_compound-engineering_pw__browser_take_screenshot({ filename: "bug-[issue]-reproduced.png" })
```
## Phase 3: Document Findings
**Reference Collection:**
- [ ] Document all research findings with specific file paths (e.g., `app/services/example_service.rb:42`)
- [ ] Include screenshots showing the bug reproduction
- [ ] List console errors if any
- [ ] Document the exact reproduction steps
## Phase 4: Report Back
Add a comment to the issue with:
1. **Findings** - What you discovered about the cause
2. **Reproduction Steps** - Exact steps to reproduce (verified)
3. **Screenshots** - Visual evidence of the bug (upload captured screenshots)
4. **Relevant Code** - File paths and line numbers
5. **Suggested Fix** - If you have oneRelated 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.