bug-fix▌
bobmatnyc/claude-mpm-skills · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Systematic workflow for verifying bug fixes to ensure quality and prevent regressions.
Bug Fix Verification
Systematic workflow for verifying bug fixes to ensure quality and prevent regressions.
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when:
- Fixing a reported bug
- Creating PR for bug fix
- Need to document bug fix verification
- Want to ensure fix doesn't introduce regressions
- Need structured approach to bug resolution
Why Bug Fix Verification Matters
Problems It Solves
- ❌ Fixing symptoms instead of root cause
- ❌ Introducing new bugs while fixing old ones
- ❌ Incomplete testing of edge cases
- ❌ No proof that bug is actually fixed
- ❌ Poor documentation of fix reasoning
Benefits
- ✅ Confirms bug is truly fixed (not masked)
- ✅ Documents root cause analysis
- ✅ Prevents regression with tests
- ✅ Provides clear evidence for stakeholders
- ✅ Improves team knowledge of codebase
Bug Fix Workflow
Step 1: Reproduce Before Fix
Critical: Never fix a bug without first reproducing it.
Reproduction Checklist
- Document exact steps to reproduce
- Capture error message/behavior with screenshots
- Note frequency (100% reproducible, intermittent, etc.)
- Video recording if UI-related or complex interaction
- Identify affected versions/environments
- Note any workarounds users have found
- Verify bug exists in clean environment (not just local)
Reproduction Documentation Template
## Bug Reproduction
### Steps to Reproduce
1. Navigate to `/dashboard`
2. Click "Export Data" button
3. Select date range: Jan 1 - Dec 31
4. Click "Generate Report"
### Expected Behavior
- Report downloads as CSV file
- File contains all transactions for date range
- Download completes in < 5 seconds
### Actual Behavior
- Error appears: "Failed to generate report"
- Console error: `TypeError: Cannot read property 'map' of undefined`
- No file downloads
- Issue occurs 100% of the time
### Environment
- Browser: Chrome 120.0.6099.109
- OS: macOS 14.2
- User Role: Admin
- Data Size: ~10,000 transactions
### Screenshots


Step 2: Root Cause Analysis
Investigate WHY the bug occurs, not just WHAT happens.
Investigation Steps
- Review Error Logs: Check server logs, browser console, error tracking
- Trace Code Path: Follow execution from trigger point to error
- Identify Breaking Point: Find exact line/function where bug occurs
- Understand Context: Why does code behave this way?
- Check Recent Changes: Did recent commit introduce this?
- Review Related Code: Are there similar patterns elsewhere?
Root Cause Documentation
## Root Cause Analysis
### Investigation
- Error occurs in `generateReport()` function at line 45
- Function assumes `transactions` array always exists
- When date range returns no results, backend returns `null`
- Frontend doesn't handle `null` case, tries to call `.map()` on `null`
### Root Cause
- Missing null check before array operations
- Backend API doesn't return consistent data structure (sometimes `[]`, sometimes `null`)
- No validation of API response shape
### Why This Wasn't Caught
- Unit tests only covered happy path (data exists)
- Integration tests didn't test empty result scenario
- Backend inconsistency not documented in API contract
Step 3: Implement Fix
Fix the root cause, not the symptom.
Fix Guidelines
- Minimal Change: Fix only what's necessary
- Defensive Coding: Add validation/guards
- Consistent Patterns: Follow existing error handling patterns
- Type Safety: Use types to prevent similar bugs
- Documentation: Comment non-obvious fixes
Example Fix
// BEFORE (Bug)
function generateReport(transactions) {
return transactions.map(t => ({
date: t.date,
amount: t.amount,
}));
}
// AFTER (Fixed)
function generateReport(transactions) {
// Guard against null/undefined from backend
if (!transactions || !Array.isArray(transactions)) {
console.warn('No transactions to export');
return [];
}
return transactions.map(t => ({
date: t.date,
amount: t.amount,
}));
}
Step 4: Verify Fix
Prove the bug is fixed through systematic testing.
Verification Checklist
- Follow same reproduction steps
- Confirm bug no longer occurs
- Test edge cases around the fix
- Verify no new errors introduced
- Check fix works across environments (dev, staging)
- Validate fix matches expected behavior
Verification Documentation
## Fix Verification
### Testing Performed
1. ✅ Followed original reproduction steps - bug no longer occurs
2. ✅ Tested with empty date range - shows "No data to export" message
3. ✅ Tested with valid date range - exports successfully
4. ✅ Tested with large dataset (50k+ transactions) - works correctly
5. ✅ Tested in Chrome, Firefox, Safari - all working
6. ✅ Tested on staging environment - fix confirmed
### Edge Cases Tested
- Empty result set → Shows appropriate message
- Null response from API → Handled gracefully
- Single transaction → Exports correctly
- Malformed transaction data → Logs error, doesn't crash
### No New Issues
- ✅ No console errors
- ✅ No memory leaks
- ✅ No performance degradation
- ✅ Other export features still work
Step 5: Add Tests to Prevent Regression
Critical: Every bug fix must include tests.
Test Requirements
- Test that reproduces original bug (should pass after fix)
- Tests for edge cases discovered during investigation
- Integration test if bug involved multiple components
- Update existing tests if they need to handle new scenarios
Example Tests
describe('generateReport', () => {
// Test that reproduces original bug
it('should handle null transactions gracefully', () => {
const result = generateReport(null);
expect(result).toEqual([]);
expect(console.warn).toHaveBeenCalledWith('No transactions to export');
});
// Edge cases
it('should handle undefined transactions', () => {
const result = generateReport(undefined);
expect(result).toEqual([]);
});
it('should handle empty array', () => {
const result = generateReport([]);
expect(result).toEqual([]);
});
it('should handle single transaction', () => {
const transactions = [{ date: '2025-01-01', amount: 100 }];
const result = generateReport(transactions);
expect(result).toHaveLength(1);
expect(result[0]).tHow to use bug-fix on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add bug-fix
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches bug-fix from GitHub repository bobmatnyc/claude-mpm-skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate bug-fix. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /bug-fix) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path▌
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.7★★★★★33 reviews- ★★★★★Liam Garcia· Dec 28, 2024
bug-fix reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Diego Huang· Dec 20, 2024
We added bug-fix from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Rahul Santra· Nov 23, 2024
bug-fix reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Valentina Torres· Nov 11, 2024
bug-fix fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Pratham Ware· Oct 14, 2024
bug-fix is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Ira Khan· Oct 2, 2024
bug-fix has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Sakshi Patil· Sep 17, 2024
Useful defaults in bug-fix — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Zara Bhatia· Sep 17, 2024
I recommend bug-fix for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Aug 8, 2024
Registry listing for bug-fix matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Olivia Taylor· Aug 8, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: bug-fix is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
showing 1-10 of 33