fix

buiducnhat/agent-skills · updated Apr 8, 2026

MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.

$npx skills add https://github.com/buiducnhat/agent-skills --skill fix
0 commentsdiscussion
summary

Use this skill to resolve bugs through a structured flow:

skill.md

Fix

Overview

Use this skill to resolve bugs through a structured flow:

  1. Intake a clear bug report
  2. Reproduce and isolate root cause
  3. Apply the smallest safe fix
  4. Verify with focused and project-wide checks
  5. Document what changed and why

Prefer correctness and safety over speed. Do not guess.

Workflow

Step 1: Bug Report Intake

Collect or confirm the minimum required issue context before changing code.

Required intake fields:

  • Title: short bug summary
  • Expected behavior: what should happen
  • Actual behavior: what happens now
  • Reproduction steps: exact steps/inputs
  • Evidence: logs, stack trace, screenshots, failing test output
  • Environment: branch, OS/runtime, app version/commit (if available)
  • Impact: severity and affected users/areas

If key fields are missing, ask targeted follow-up questions first.

Step 2: Reproduce and Diagnose

  1. Reproduce the issue consistently.
  2. Locate the failure point (file, function, line range, or subsystem).
  3. Trace data/control flow to identify the root cause.
  4. Define a fix hypothesis and confirm it explains the observed behavior.

Guidelines:

  • Read surrounding code, not just the failing line.
  • Prefer root-cause fixes, not symptom patches.
  • Add temporary diagnostics/logging only if needed to isolate behavior.
  • Remove or clean up temporary diagnostics after verification.

Step 3: Complexity Gate (Go / No-Go)

Classify the fix before implementation:

Simple Fix (proceed in this skill)

All or most are true:

  • Clear root cause
  • Localized change (small surface area)
  • Low architectural risk
  • Limited file impact
  • Verification path is straightforward

Complex/Risky Fix (stop and route to write-plan)

Any are true:

  • Root cause still unclear
  • Cross-cutting or architectural changes needed
  • Significant refactor or migration involved
  • High regression risk
  • Multi-phase rollout required
  • External dependency or infra uncertainty

If complex, stop and recommend creating a plan with write-plan.

Step 4: Implement the Fix (Simple Path)

  1. State a brief fix plan in 1-3 bullets.
  2. Apply minimal, targeted code changes.
  3. Keep behavior changes explicit and scoped.
  4. Add/adjust tests to prevent regression when applicable.

Implementation rules:

  • Avoid unrelated refactors.
  • Preserve existing conventions and project standards.
  • Keep changes idempotent and safe to re-run where relevant.

Step 5: Verify

Run verification in increasing scope:

  1. Focused checks for the affected module/feature
  2. Regression checks for nearby behavior
  3. Project checks as relevant (lint/typecheck/tests/build)

Bug is fixed only when:

  • Reproduction no longer fails
  • Expected behavior is confirmed
  • No critical regressions introduced

If verification fails unexpectedly, stop and reassess diagnosis.

Step 6: Complete and Report

Provide a concise completion report:

  • Root cause
  • What changed
  • Why this fix works
  • Verification performed and results
  • Residual risks / follow-ups (if any)

If architecture, codebase structure, or product behavior changed materially, update documentation artifacts (typically docs/project-pdr.md, docs/codebase.md, docs/architecture.md) via the docs workflow.

Rules

  • No guessing: Question Tool when critical context is missing.
  • Root cause first: never ship symptom-only patches knowingly.
  • Smallest safe change: minimize blast radius.
  • Verify before done: no fix is complete without checks.
  • Escalate complexity: use write-plan for risky/broad changes.

Optional Bug Report Template

Use this template when the user provides an incomplete issue report:

  • Title:
  • Expected behavior:
  • Actual behavior:
  • Reproduction steps:
  • Error logs/stack trace:
  • Environment:
  • Impact/severity:
  • Additional context:
how to use fix

How to use fix on Cursor

AI-first code editor with Composer

1

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 fix
2

Execute installation command

Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:

$npx skills add https://github.com/buiducnhat/agent-skills --skill fix

The skills CLI fetches fix from GitHub repository buiducnhat/agent-skills and configures it for Cursor.

3

Select Cursor when prompted

The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:

◆ Which agents do you want to install to?
│ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ── always included ────
│ • Amp
│ • Antigravity
│ • Cline
│ • Codex
│ ●Cursor(selected)
│ • Cursor
│ • Windsurf
4

Verify installation

Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:

.cursor/skills/fix

Reload or restart Cursor to activate fix. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /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

GET_STARTED →

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. 1.Install product management skill
  2. 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
  3. 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
  4. 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
  5. 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
  6. 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
  7. 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

  1. 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
  2. 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
  3. 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
  4. 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation

Discussion

Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)
  • No comments yet — start the thread.
general reviews

Ratings

4.750 reviews
  • Dhruvi Jain· Dec 28, 2024

    Registry listing for fix matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.

  • Meera Li· Dec 8, 2024

    Useful defaults in fix — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.

  • Meera Okafor· Dec 4, 2024

    fix has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.

  • Ama Mehta· Nov 27, 2024

    I recommend fix for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.

  • Naina Agarwal· Nov 23, 2024

    Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: fix is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.

  • Oshnikdeep· Nov 19, 2024

    Keeps context tight: fix is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

  • Rahul Santra· Nov 11, 2024

    fix reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.

  • Dev Brown· Oct 18, 2024

    Keeps context tight: fix is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

  • Diya Taylor· Oct 14, 2024

    fix is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.

  • Ganesh Mohane· Oct 10, 2024

    I recommend fix for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.

showing 1-10 of 50

1 / 5