gstack-openclaw-investigate

Name: gstack-openclaw-investigate
Availability: InStock
Author: shekerkamma

Investigates root causes of software bugs before allowing code modifications.

Updated May 22, 2026

Search Tags:#software engineering #debugging #root cause analysis #bug fixing #regression testing #error investigation

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/shekerkamma/peopletech-marketplace --skill gstack-openclaw-investigate-shekerkamma

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: gstack-openclaw-investigate
Source: https://github.com/shekerkamma/peopletech-marketplace/tree/main/plugins/gstack/openclaw/skills/gstack-openclaw-investigate
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/shekerkamma/peopletech-marketplace --skill gstack-openclaw-investigate-shekerkamma

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This skill eliminates the common pitfall of whack-a-mole debugging, where temporary symptom fixes create recurring bugs and make future issues harder to diagnose, by enforcing mandatory root cause investigation before any code changes are made.

Core Features & Use Cases

Structured 4-Phase Workflow: Guides users through root cause investigation, pattern analysis, hypothesis testing, and implementation to ensure fixes address underlying issues, not just symptoms.
Common Bug Pattern Matching: Includes checklists for race conditions, nil propagation, state corruption, and other frequent bug types to speed up diagnosis.
Built-in Safety Guardrails: Enforces a 3-strike rule for failed hypotheses, flags high-blast-radius fixes (>5 files changed), and requires regression tests and full verification before completion.
Use Case: Perfect for developers investigating production errors, stack traces, or unexpected behavior that has occurred multiple times in the same code area, indicating potential architectural issues.

Quick Start

Use the gstack-openclaw-investigate skill to debug the intermittent timeout errors reported in the user notification service.

Frequently Asked Questions about gstack-openclaw-investigate

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I stop recurring bugs and whack-a-mole debugging in my application?▼

To stop whack-a-mole debugging, you must enforce mandatory root cause investigation prior to any code modifications. This structured approach ensures fixes address underlying architectural issues rather than just treating temporary symptoms that recur.

What is the best way to investigate intermittent production errors and stack traces?▼

The best way to investigate production errors and stack traces is using a structured 4-phase workflow: root cause investigation, pattern analysis, hypothesis testing, and implementation. This includes matching common bug patterns like race conditions and state corruption.

How do I carry out root cause analysis for unexpected software behavior?▼

Root cause analysis for unexpected behavior requires testing hypotheses against identified patterns. If three hypotheses fail, built-in safety guardrails flag the issue, preventing high-blast-radius fixes and ensuring regression tests are created before completion.

Does this structured debugging workflow work for full-stack regression testing?▼

Yes, structured debugging workflows apply to full-stack regression root cause identification. The process requires full verification and regression test creation before completion to prevent recurring architectural issues across your entire application stack.

What are the limitations or safety guardrails when fixing high-blast-radius bugs?▼

Safety guardrails limit high-blast-radius bug fixes by flagging any changes affecting more than 5 files. Additionally, a 3-strike rule halts progress after failed hypotheses, ensuring structured debug reporting and full verification are completed.

When do I need a structured debugging workflow for error investigation?▼

You need a structured debugging workflow for error investigation when unexpected behavior occurs multiple times in the same code area. This indicates potential architectural issues requiring pattern analysis and hypothesis testing rather than superficial symptom patching.