reproduce-bug▌
n8n-io/n8n · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Given a Linear ticket context ($ARGUMENTS), systematically reproduce the bug
- ›with a failing regression test.
Bug Reproduction Framework
Given a Linear ticket context ($ARGUMENTS), systematically reproduce the bug with a failing regression test.
Step 1: Parse Signals
Extract the following from the provided ticket context:
- Error message / stack trace (if provided)
- Reproduction steps (if provided)
- Workflow JSON (if attached)
- Affected area (node, execution engine, editor, API, config, etc.)
- Version where it broke / last working version
Step 2: Route to Test Strategy
Based on the affected area, pick the test layer and pattern:
| Area | Test Layer | Pattern | Key Location |
|---|---|---|---|
| Node operation | Jest unit | NodeTestHarness + nock | packages/nodes-base/nodes/*/test/ |
| Node credential | Jest unit | jest-mock-extended | packages/nodes-base/nodes/*/test/ |
| Trigger webhook | Jest unit | mock IHookFunctions + jest.mock GenericFunctions | packages/nodes-base/nodes/*/test/ |
| Binary data | Jest unit | NodeTestHarness assertBinaryData | packages/core/nodes-testing/ |
| Execution engine | Jest integration | WorkflowRunner + DI container | packages/cli/src/__tests__/ |
| CLI / API | Jest integration | setupTestServer + supertest | packages/cli/test/integration/ |
| Config | Jest unit | GlobalConfig + Container | packages/@n8n/config/src/__tests__/ |
| Editor UI | Vitest | Vue Test Utils + Pinia | packages/frontend/editor-ui/src/**/__tests__/ |
| E2E / Canvas | Playwright | Test containers + composables | packages/testing/playwright/ |
Step 3: Locate Source Files
Find the source code for the affected area:
- Search for the node/service/component mentioned in the ticket
- Find the GenericFunctions file (common bug location for nodes)
- Check for existing test files in the same area
- Look at recent git history on affected files (
git log --oneline -10 -- <path>)
Step 4: Trace the Code Path
Read the source code and trace the execution path that triggers the bug:
- Follow the call chain from entry point to the failure
- Identify the specific line(s) where the bug manifests
- Note any error handling (or lack thereof) around the bug
Step 5: Form Hypothesis
State a clear, testable hypothesis:
- "When [input/condition], the code does [wrong thing] because [root cause]"
- Identify the exact line(s) that need to change
- Predict what the test output will show
Step 6: Find Test Patterns
Look for existing tests in the same area:
- Check
test/directories near the affected code - Identify which mock/setup patterns they use
- Use the same patterns for consistency
- If no tests exist, find the closest similar node/service tests as a template
Step 7: Write Failing Test
Write a regression test that:
- Uses the patterns found in Step 6
- Targets the specific hypothesis from Step 5
- Includes a comment referencing the ticket ID
- Asserts the CORRECT behavior (test will fail on current code)
- Also includes a "happy path" test to prove the setup works
Step 8: Run and Score
Run the test from the package directory (e.g., cd packages/nodes-base && pnpm test <file>).
Classify the result:
| Confidence | Criteria | Output |
|---|---|---|
| CONFIRMED | Test fails consistently, failure matches hypothesis | Reproduction Report |
| LIKELY | Test fails but failure mode differs slightly | Report + caveat |
| UNCONFIRMED | Cannot trigger the failure | Report: what was tried |
| SKIPPED | Hit a hard bailout trigger | Report: why skipped |
| ALREADY_FIXED | Bug no longer reproduces on current code | Report: when fixed |
Step 9: Iterate or Bail
If UNCONFIRMED after first attempt:
- Revisit hypothesis — re-read the code path
- Try a different test approach or layer
- Maximum 3 attempts before declaring UNCONFIRMED
Hard bailout triggers (stop immediately):
- Requires real third-party API credentials
- Race condition / timing-dependent
- Requires specific cloud/enterprise infrastructure
- Requires manual UI interaction that can't be scripted
Output: Reproduction Report
Present findings in this format:
Ticket: [ID] — [title] Confidence: [CONFIRMED | LIKELY | UNCONFIRMED | SKIPPED | ALREADY_FIXED]
Root Cause
[1-2 sentences explaining the bug mechanism]
Location
| File | Lines | Issue |
|---|---|---|
path/to/file.ts |
XX-YY | Description of the problem |
Failing Test
path/to/test/file.test.ts — X/Y tests fail:
test name— [failure description]
Fix Hint
[Pseudocode or description of the fix approach]
Important
- DO NOT fix the bug — only reproduce it with a failing test
- Leave test files in place as evidence (don't commit unless asked)
- Run tests from the package directory (e.g.,
pushd packages/nodes-base && pnpm test <file> && popd) - Always redirect build output:
pnpm build > build.log 2>&1 - DO NOT look at existing fix PRs — the goal is to reproduce from signals alone
How to use reproduce-bug 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 reproduce-bug
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches reproduce-bug from GitHub repository n8n-io/n8n 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 reproduce-bug. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /reproduce-bug) 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
4.4★★★★★74 reviews- ★★★★★Arjun Okafor· Dec 16, 2024
reproduce-bug is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Michael Abebe· Dec 8, 2024
Keeps context tight: reproduce-bug is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Dec 4, 2024
Useful defaults in reproduce-bug — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Kiara Johnson· Dec 4, 2024
We added reproduce-bug from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Emma Dixit· Nov 27, 2024
We added reproduce-bug from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Piyush G· Nov 23, 2024
reproduce-bug has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Arjun Kim· Nov 23, 2024
Keeps context tight: reproduce-bug is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Arjun Chen· Nov 7, 2024
reproduce-bug fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Lucas Iyer· Oct 26, 2024
We added reproduce-bug from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Ishan Desai· Oct 18, 2024
reproduce-bug fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
showing 1-10 of 74