kiro-debug
# kiro-debug **What it does:** kiro-debug is a root-cause-first debugging skill that investigates implementation failures by gathering evidence from error messages, runtime state, git changes, and external documentation before proposing fixes. It produces a structured diagnosis with category, root cause, fix plan, and confidence level. **When to use it:** Apply kiro-debug when an implementer reports being blocked, a reviewer rejects the same failure after remediation attempts, validation fails unexpectedly, or a task appears to conflict with platform constraints. Do not use it for speculative fixes without evidence gathering.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gotalab/cc-sdd /tmp/kiro-debug && cp -r /tmp/kiro-debug/tools/cc-sdd/templates/agents/gemini-cli-skills/skills/kiro-debug ~/.claude/skills/kiro-debugSKILL.md
# kiro-debug <background_information> This skill is for fresh-context root cause investigation. It combines local evidence, runtime/config inspection, and external documentation or issue research when available. It is not a patch generator for guess-first debugging. </background_information> <instructions> ## When to Use - Implementer reports `BLOCKED` - Reviewer rejection repeats after remediation - Validation fails unexpectedly - A task appears to conflict with runtime or platform reality - The same failure survives more than one attempted fix Do not use this skill to speculate about fixes before gathering evidence. ## Inputs Provide: - Exact failure symptom or blocker statement - Error messages, stack trace, and failing command output - Current `git diff` or summary of uncommitted failed changes - Task brief: what was being built - Reviewer feedback, if the failure came from review rejection - Relevant spec file paths (`requirements.md`, `design.md`) - Relevant requirement/design section numbers - Relevant `## Implementation Notes` - Runtime or environment constraints already known ## Outputs Return: - `ROOT_CAUSE` - `CATEGORY` - `FIX_PLAN` - `VERIFICATION` - `NEXT_ACTION: RETRY_TASK | BLOCK_TASK | STOP_FOR_HUMAN` - `CONFIDENCE: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW` - `NOTES` Use the language specified in `spec.json`. ## Method ### 1. Read the Error Carefully Extract: - Exact error text - Stack trace or failure location - The command that produced the failure - Whether the failure is deterministic or intermittent ### 2. Inspect Local Runtime and Repository State Inspect the repository for local evidence: - `package.json`, `pyproject.toml`, `go.mod`, `Makefile`, `README*` - Build config - `tsconfig` or equivalent language/runtime config - Runtime-specific config - Dependency versions and scripts - Relevant changed files from `git diff` ### 3. Search the Web if Available If web access is available, search: - The exact error message - The technology + symptom combination - Official documentation - Version-specific issue trackers or migration notes Prefer: - Official docs - Official repos/issues - Version-specific references - Runtime-specific documentation ### 4. Classify the Root Cause Use one category: - `MISSING_DEPENDENCY` - `RUNTIME_MISMATCH` - `MODULE_FORMAT` - `NATIVE_ABI` - `CONFIG_GAP` - `LOGIC_ERROR` - `TASK_ORDERING_PROBLEM` - `TASK_DECOMPOSITION_PROBLEM` - `SPEC_CONFLICT` - `EXTERNAL_DEPENDENCY` ### 5. Determine the Smallest Safe Next Action Decide whether the issue can be fixed inside this repo by: - Editing files - Adjusting configuration - Adding or correcting dependencies - Restructuring code Use `NEXT_ACTION: RETRY_TASK` when the issue is repo-fixable inside the current approved task plan. ### 6. Determine Whether the Task Plan Is Still Valid Decide whether the current approved task plan is still safe to execute as written. Prefer `NEXT_ACTION: STOP_FOR_HUMAN` when: - A missing prerequisite task should exist before this one - The current task is ordered incorrectly relative to unfinished work - The current task boundary is wrong and should be split or merged - The task is too large or ambiguous to fix safely inside the current implementation loop Use `NEXT_ACTION: BLOCK_TASK` only when the current task should stop but the rest of the queue can still proceed safely. Do not propose a brute-force code fix as a substitute for revising `tasks.md` or the approved plan. ## Critical Rule Do not propose a multi-fix shotgun plan. Identify the root cause first, then produce the smallest plausible fix plan. If the true problem is a spec conflict or architecture problem, say so directly. ## Stop / Escalate Use `NEXT_ACTION: STOP_FOR_HUMAN` when the blocker genuinely requires: - Human product/requirements decision - External credentials or inaccessible services - Hardware or unavailable external systems - Re-scoping due to spec/platform conflict If the issue is fixable by repo changes inside the current task plan, do not escalate prematurely. ## Common Rationalizations | Rationalization | Reality | |---|---| | “This probably just needs a quick patch” | Patch-first debugging creates rework. | | “Let’s try a few fixes” | Multi-fix guessing hides root cause. | | “The spec is probably wrong, I’ll adapt it” | Spec conflicts must be surfaced explicitly. | | “The docs search is optional” | For runtime/dependency issues, docs and version issues often contain the shortest path to root cause. | ## Output Format ```md ## Debug Report - ROOT_CAUSE: <1-2 sentence root cause> - CATEGORY: MISSING_DEPENDENCY | RUNTIME_MISMATCH | MODULE_FORMAT | NATIVE_ABI | CONFIG_GAP | LOGIC_ERROR | TASK_ORDERING_PROBLEM | TASK_DECOMPOSITION_PROBLEM | SPEC_CONFLICT | EXTERNAL_DEPENDENCY - FIX_PLAN: 1. <specific repo-fixable action> 2. <specific repo-fixable action> - VERIFICATION: <command(s) to confirm the fix> - NEXT_ACTION: RETRY_TASK | BLOCK_TASK | STOP_FOR_HUMAN - CONFIDENCE: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW - NOTES: <context the next implementer should know> ``` </instructions>
Add or extend coding-agent support in cc-sdd by executing the SOP in docs/cc-sdd/sop-new-agent.md end-to-end. Use when introducing a new agent, adding a subagent-capable variant, or evaluating migration of an existing supported agent to skills-based templates.
Entry point for new work. Determines the best action path or work decomposition (update existing spec, create new spec, mixed decomposition, or no spec needed) and refines ideas through structured dialogue.
Implement approved tasks using TDD with subagent dispatch. Runs all pending tasks autonomously or selected tasks manually.
Review a task implementation against approved specs, task boundaries, and verification evidence. Use after an implementer finishes a task, after remediation, or before accepting a task as complete.
Create complete specs (requirements, design, tasks) for all features in roadmap.md using parallel sub-agent dispatch by dependency wave.
Create comprehensive technical design for a specification
Initialize a new specification with detailed project description
Quick spec generation with interactive or automatic mode