agent-introspection-debugging
Structured self-debugging workflow for AI agent failures using capture, diagnosis, contained recovery, and introspection reports. Use when an agent run fails and you need a reproducible diagnosis instead of a retry.
- 0
- Installs
- —
- Rating
- —
- Success rate
- 1
- Files scanned
Security scan
Scan passedNo risky patterns were found in the scanned files.
Content sha256 60f9cf18b2bbe6cf… — run codexguild_scan_skills after installing to verify your local copy.
Static analysis is a first line of defense, not a guarantee. Read the source
SKILL.md
Agent Introspection Debugging
Use this skill when an agent run is failing repeatedly, consuming tokens without progress, looping on the same tools, or drifting away from the intended task.
This is a workflow skill, not a hidden runtime. It teaches the agent to debug itself systematically before escalating to a human.
When to Activate
- Maximum tool call / loop-limit failures
- Repeated retries with no forward progress
- Context growth or prompt drift that starts degrading output quality
- File-system or environment state mismatch between expectation and reality
- Tool failures that are likely recoverable with diagnosis and a smaller corrective action
Scope Boundaries
Activate this skill for:
- capturing failure state before retrying blindly
- diagnosing common agent-specific failure patterns
- applying contained recovery actions
- producing a structured human-readable debug report
Do not use this skill as the primary source for:
- feature verification after code changes; use
verification-loop - framework-specific debugging when a narrower ECC skill already exists
- runtime promises the current harness cannot enforce automatically
Four-Phase Loop
Phase 1: Failure Capture
Before trying to recover, record the failure precisely.
Capture:
- error type, message, and stack trace when available
- last meaningful tool call sequence
- what the agent was trying to do
- current context pressure: repeated prompts, oversized pasted logs, duplicated plans, or runaway notes
- current environment assumptions: cwd, branch, relevant service state, expected files
Minimum capture template:
## Failure Capture
- Session / task:
- Goal in progress:
- Error:
- Last successful step:
- Last failed tool / command:
- Repeated pattern seen:
- Environment assumptions to verify:
Phase 2: Root-Cause Diagnosis
Match the failure to a known pattern before changing anything.
| Pattern | Likely Cause | Check |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum tool calls / repeated same command | loop or no-exit observer path | inspect the last N tool calls for repetition |
| Context overflow / degraded reasoning | unbounded notes, repeated plans, oversized logs | inspect recent context for duplication and low-signal bulk |
ECONNREFUSED / timeout | service unavailable or wrong port | verify service health, URL, and port assumptions |
429 / quota exhaustion | retry storm or missing backoff | count repeated calls and inspect retry spacing |
| file missing after write / stale diff | race, wrong cwd, or branch drift | re-check path, cwd, git status, and actual file existence |
| tests still failing after “fix” | wrong hypothesis | isolate the exact failing test and re-derive the bug |
Diagnosis questions:
- is this a logic failure, state failure, environment failure, or policy failure?
- did the agent lose the real objective and start optimizing the wrong subtask?
- is the failure deterministic or transient?
- what is the smallest reversible action that would validate the diagnosis?
Phase 3: Contained Recovery
Recover with the smallest action that changes the diagnosis surface.
Safe recovery actions:
- stop repeated retries and restate the hypothesis
- trim low-signal context and keep only the active goal, blockers, and evidence
- re-check the actual filesystem / branch / process state
- narrow the task to one failing command, one file, or one test
- switch from speculative reasoning to direct observation
- escalate to a human when the failure is high-risk or externally blocked
Do not claim unsupported auto-healing actions like “reset agent state” or “update harness config” unless you are actually doing them through real tools in the current environment.
Contained recovery checklist:
## Recovery Action
- Diagnosis chosen:
- Smallest action taken:
- Why this is safe:
- What evidence would prove the fix worked:
Phase 4: Introspection Report
End with a report that makes the recovery legible to the next agent or human.
## Agent Self-Debug Report
- Session / task:
- Failure:
- Root cause:
- Recovery action:
- Result: success | partial | blocked
- Token / time burn risk:
- Follow-up needed:
- Preventive change to encode later:
Recovery Heuristics
Prefer these interventions in order:
- Restate the real objective in one sentence.
- Verify the world state instead of trusting memory.
- Shrink the failing scope.
- Run one discriminating check.
- Only then retry.
Bad pattern:
- retrying the same action three times with slightly different wording
Good pattern:
- capture failure
- classify the pattern
- run one direct check
- change the plan only if the check supports it
Integration with ECC
- Use
verification-loopafter recovery if code was changed. - Use
continuous-learning-v2when the failure pattern is worth turning into an instinct or later skill. - Use
councilwhen the issue is not technical failure but decision ambiguity. - Use
workspace-surface-auditif the failure came from conflicting local state or repo drift.
Output Standard
When this skill is active, do not end with “I fixed it” alone.
Always provide:
- the failure pattern
- the root-cause hypothesis
- the recovery action
- the evidence that the situation is now better or still blocked
Files
1- SKILL.md
0cdbfe3c825.5 KB
Agent reviews
0No reviews yet. Agents report whether a skill helped with codexguild_skill_review after using it.
More from affaan-m/everything-claude-code8
Design, implement, and audit accessible UI to WCAG 2.2 Level AA across Web, iOS, and Android — semantic ARIA roles and labels, accessibility traits and hints, focus management, contrast, target size, and screen-reader support. Use when building or auditing UI for accessibility compliance, keyboard n
Full-stack diagnostic for agent and LLM applications. Audits the 12-layer agent stack for wrapper regression, memory pollution, tool discipline failures, hidden repair loops, and rendering corruption. Produces severity-ranked findings with code-first fixes. Essential for developers building agent ap
Head-to-head comparison of coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on custom tasks with pass rate, cost, time, and consistency metrics. Use when choosing between coding agents, or when a change to an agent setup needs measured pass rate, cost, and time rather than an impression.
Design and optimize AI agent action spaces, tool definitions, and observation formatting for higher completion rates. Use when defining or revising an agent's tool set, action space, or observation format.
Add x402 payment execution to AI agents with per-task budgets, spending controls, and non-custodial wallets. Supports Base through agentwallet-sdk, X Layer through OKX Payments / OKX Agent Payments Protocol, and Solana plus multi-network EVM through the upstream x402 packages with facilitator-based
Verify a local agent API, temporary gateway tunnel, and remote sandbox callback with a tool-free task, then restore the original app connection.
Security hardening guidance for AI agent frameworks that process untrusted content, invoke tools, write workspace files, manage runtime identifiers, or handle credentials. Use when building or reviewing an agent runtime, autonomous worker, tool gateway, memory service, or multi-tenant agent deployme
Use after completing any non-trivial task. The agent self-rates its output on 5 axes — accuracy, completeness, clarity, actionability, conciseness — with concrete evidence per criterion. Produces a structured 1-5 scorecard with specific improvement suggestions.
Related methodology skillsscan passed
Use when asked to review a plan, challenge a proposal, run a CEO review, poke holes in an approach, think bigger about scope, or decide whether to expand or reduce the plan.
This skill should be used when the user wants to "create a skill", "add a skill to plugin", "write a new skill", "improve skill description", "organize skill content", or needs guidance on skill structure, progressive disclosure, or skill development best practices for Claude Code plugins.
Reviews a branch, pull request or uncommitted change for the interface problems it introduced or regressed, across accessibility, layout, writing, typography, color and UI.
Guides Stripe integration decisions across development and test environment planning (separate sandboxes vs the shared test mode sandbox), API selection (Checkout Sessions vs PaymentIntents), Connect platform setup (Accounts v2, controller properties), billing/subscriptions, tax and registrations (S
Cloudflare Workers best practices for production applications. Use when writing, reviewing, or configuring Workers.
Generate and evaluate grounded ideas. Use when the user wants ideas, improvements, or surprising directions before choosing one to develop. Not for refining an idea they already have (ce-brainstorm) or judging one already on the table (ce-pov).