Our review
Fixes a specific bug by analyzing the codebase directly, applying a fix with logging, and suggesting test coverage.
Strengths
- Systematic approach to find root cause without plans
- Mandatory logging for verification and iteration
- Automatically suggests a test to prevent regression
- Leverages past patches for faster fixes
Limitations
- Requires a clear problem description from the user
- May struggle with complex or cross-cutting bugs
- User must manually verify the fix works
When the user reports a bug, error, or unexpected behavior with enough context to investigate.
For feature requests, architectural changes, or open-ended exploration without a specific issue.
Security analysis
SafeThe skill is a bug-fixing workflow that uses standard code analysis and editing tools. It contains no destructive commands, network calls, data exfiltration, or instructions to bypass safety. The Bash usage is limited to creating a directory for patches, which is harmless.
No concerns found
Examples
The login form throws an error when the username contains an apostrophe (e.g., O'Brien). Please fix it.The API endpoint /users returns a 500 status when passing an empty string for the email parameter. Fix this bug and add logging.The application crashes when a user has a null date of birth. Here's the stack trace: TypeError: Cannot read property 'getFullYear' of null. Please fix it.name: ai-factory.fix description: Fix a specific bug or problem in the codebase. Analyzes code to find and fix issues without creating plans. Use when user reports a bug, error, or something not working. Always suggests test coverage and adds logging. argument-hint: <bug description or error message> allowed-tools: Read Write Edit Glob Grep Bash AskUserQuestion disable-model-invocation: false
Fix - Quick Bug Fix Workflow
Fix a specific bug or problem by analyzing the codebase directly. No plans, no reports.
Workflow
Step 0: Load Project Context & Past Experience
Read .ai-factory/DESCRIPTION.md if it exists to understand:
- Tech stack (language, framework, database)
- Project architecture
- Coding conventions
Read all patches from .ai-factory/patches/ if the directory exists:
- Use
Globto find all*.mdfiles in.ai-factory/patches/ - Read each patch file to learn from past fixes
- Pay attention to recurring patterns, root causes, and solutions
- If the current problem resembles a past patch — apply the same approach or avoid the same mistakes
- This is your accumulated experience. Use it.
Step 1: Understand the Problem
From $ARGUMENTS, identify:
- Error message or unexpected behavior
- Where it occurs (file, function, endpoint)
- Steps to reproduce (if provided)
If unclear, ask:
To fix this effectively, I need more context:
1. What is the expected behavior?
2. What actually happens?
3. Can you share the error message/stack trace?
4. When did this start happening?
Step 2: Investigate the Codebase
Search for the problem:
- Find relevant files using Glob/Grep
- Read the code around the issue
- Trace the data flow
- Check for similar patterns elsewhere
Look for:
- The root cause (not just symptoms)
- Related code that might be affected
- Existing error handling
Step 3: Implement the Fix
Apply the fix with logging:
// ✅ REQUIRED: Add logging around the fix
console.log('[FIX] Processing user input', { userId, input });
try {
// The actual fix
const result = fixedLogic(input);
console.log('[FIX] Success', { userId, result });
return result;
} catch (error) {
console.error('[FIX] Error in fixedLogic', {
userId,
input,
error: error.message,
stack: error.stack
});
throw error;
}
Logging is MANDATORY because:
- User needs to verify the fix works
- If it doesn't work, logs help debug further
- Feedback loop: user provides logs → we iterate
Step 4: Verify the Fix
- Check the code compiles/runs
- Verify the logic is correct
- Ensure no regressions introduced
Step 5: Suggest Test Coverage
ALWAYS suggest covering this case with a test:
## Fix Applied ✅
The issue was: [brief explanation]
Fixed by: [what was changed]
### Logging Added
The fix includes logging with prefix `[FIX]`.
Please test and share any logs if issues persist.
### Recommended: Add a Test
This bug should be covered by a test to prevent regression:
\`\`\`typescript
describe('functionName', () => {
it('should handle [the edge case that caused the bug]', () => {
// Arrange
const input = /* the problematic input */;
// Act
const result = functionName(input);
// Assert
expect(result).toBe(/* expected */);
});
});
\`\`\`
Would you like me to create this test?
- [ ] Yes, create the test
- [ ] No, skip for now
Logging Requirements
All fixes MUST include logging:
- Log prefix: Use
[FIX]or[FIX:<issue-id>]for easy filtering - Log inputs: What data was being processed
- Log success: Confirm the fix worked
- Log errors: Full context if something fails
- Configurable: Use LOG_LEVEL if available
// Pattern for fixes
const LOG_FIX = process.env.LOG_LEVEL === 'debug' || process.env.DEBUG_FIX;
function fixedFunction(input) {
if (LOG_FIX) console.log('[FIX] Input:', input);
// ... fix logic ...
if (LOG_FIX) console.log('[FIX] Output:', result);
return result;
}
Examples
Example 1: Null Reference Error
User: /fix TypeError: Cannot read property 'name' of undefined in UserProfile
Actions:
- Search for UserProfile component/function
- Find where
.nameis accessed - Add null check with logging
- Suggest test for null user case
Example 2: API Returns Wrong Data
User: /fix /api/orders returns empty array for authenticated users
Actions:
- Find orders API endpoint
- Trace the query logic
- Find the bug (e.g., wrong filter)
- Fix with logging
- Suggest integration test
Example 3: Form Validation Not Working
User: /fix email validation accepts invalid emails
Actions:
- Find email validation logic
- Check regex or validation library usage
- Fix the validation
- Add logging for validation failures
- Suggest unit test with edge cases
Important Rules
- NO plans - This is a direct fix, not planned work
- NO reports - Don't create summary documents
- ALWAYS log - Every fix must have logging for feedback
- ALWAYS suggest tests - Help prevent regressions
- Root cause - Fix the actual problem, not symptoms
- Minimal changes - Don't refactor unrelated code
- One fix at a time - Don't scope creep
After Fixing
## Fix Applied ✅
**Issue:** [what was broken]
**Cause:** [why it was broken]
**Fix:** [what was changed]
**Files modified:**
- path/to/file.ts (line X)
**Logging added:** Yes, prefix `[FIX]`
**Test suggested:** Yes
Please test the fix and share logs if any issues.
To add the suggested test:
- [ ] Yes, create test
- [ ] No, skip
Step 6: Create Self-Improvement Patch
ALWAYS create a patch after every fix. This builds a knowledge base for future fixes.
Create the patch:
-
Create directory if it doesn't exist:
mkdir -p .ai-factory/patches -
Create a patch file with the current timestamp as filename. Format:
YYYY-MM-DD-HH.mm.md(e.g.,2026-02-07-14.30.md) -
Use this template:
# [Brief title describing the fix]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm
**Files:** list of modified files
**Severity:** low | medium | high | critical
## Problem
What was broken. How it manifested (error message, wrong behavior).
Be specific — include the actual error or symptom.
## Root Cause
WHY the problem occurred. This is the most valuable part.
Not "what was wrong" but "why it was wrong":
- Logic error? Why was the logic incorrect?
- Missing check? Why was it missing?
- Wrong assumption? What was assumed?
- Race condition? What sequence caused it?
## Solution
How the fix was implemented. Key code changes and reasoning.
Include the approach, not just "changed line X".
## Prevention
How to prevent this class of problems in the future:
- What pattern/practice should be followed?
- What should be checked during code review?
- What test would catch this?
## Tags
Space-separated tags for categorization, e.g.:
`#null-check` `#async` `#validation` `#typescript` `#api` `#database`
Example patch:
# Null reference in UserProfile when user has no avatar
**Date:** 2026-02-07 14:30
**Files:** src/components/UserProfile.tsx
**Severity:** medium
## Problem
TypeError: Cannot read property 'url' of undefined when rendering
UserProfile for users without an uploaded avatar.
## Root Cause
The `user.avatar` field is optional in the database schema but the
component accessed `user.avatar.url` without a null check. This was
introduced in commit abc123 when avatar display was added — the
developer tested only with users that had avatars.
## Solution
Added optional chaining: `user.avatar?.url` with a fallback to a
default avatar URL. Also added a null check in the Avatar sub-component.
## Prevention
- Always check if database fields marked as `nullable` / `optional`
are handled with null checks in the UI layer
- Add test cases for "empty state" — user with minimal data
- Consider a lint rule for accessing nested optional properties
## Tags
`#null-check` `#react` `#optional-field` `#typescript`
This is NOT optional. Every fix generates a patch. The patch is your learning.
DO NOT:
- ❌ Create PLAN.md or any plan files
- ❌ Generate reports or summaries (patches are NOT reports — they are learning artifacts)
- ❌ Refactor unrelated code
- ❌ Add features while fixing
- ❌ Skip logging
- ❌ Skip test suggestion
- ❌ Skip patch creation
Next.js App Router Expert
Development
A skill that turns Claude into a Next.js App Router expert.
README Generator
Development
Creates professional and comprehensive README.md files for your projects.
API Documentation Writer
Development
Generates comprehensive API documentation in OpenAPI/Swagger format.