mirror of
https://github.com/wshobson/agents.git
synced 2026-03-18 17:47:16 +00:00
Rewrites 14 commands across 11 plugins to remove all cross-plugin subagent_type references (e.g., "unit-testing::test-automator"), which break when plugins are installed standalone. Each command now uses only local bundled agents or general-purpose with role context in the prompt. All rewritten commands follow conductor-style patterns: - CRITICAL BEHAVIORAL RULES with strong directives - State files for session tracking and resume support - Phase checkpoints requiring explicit user approval - File-based context passing between steps Also fixes 4 plugin.json files missing version/license fields and adds plugin.json for dotnet-contribution. Closes #433
540 lines
18 KiB
Markdown
540 lines
18 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
description: "Intelligent issue resolution with multi-agent debugging, root cause analysis, and verified fix implementation"
|
|
argument-hint: "<issue description> [--verification minimal|standard|comprehensive] [--prevention none|immediate|comprehensive]"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Intelligent Issue Resolution Orchestrator
|
|
|
|
## CRITICAL BEHAVIORAL RULES
|
|
|
|
You MUST follow these rules exactly. Violating any of them is a failure.
|
|
|
|
1. **Execute steps in order.** Do NOT skip ahead, reorder, or merge steps.
|
|
2. **Write output files.** Each step MUST produce its output file in `.smart-fix/` before the next step begins. Read from prior step files — do NOT rely on context window memory.
|
|
3. **Stop at checkpoints.** When you reach a `PHASE CHECKPOINT`, you MUST stop and wait for explicit user approval before continuing. Use the AskUserQuestion tool with clear options.
|
|
4. **Halt on failure.** If any step fails (agent error, test failure, missing dependency), STOP immediately. Present the error and ask the user how to proceed. Do NOT silently continue.
|
|
5. **Use only local agents.** All `subagent_type` references use agents bundled with this plugin or `general-purpose`. No cross-plugin dependencies.
|
|
6. **Never enter plan mode autonomously.** Do NOT use EnterPlanMode. This command IS the plan — execute it.
|
|
|
|
## Pre-flight Checks
|
|
|
|
Before starting, perform these checks:
|
|
|
|
### 1. Check for existing session
|
|
|
|
Check if `.smart-fix/state.json` exists:
|
|
|
|
- If it exists and `status` is `"in_progress"`: Read it, display the current step, and ask the user:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Found an in-progress smart-fix session:
|
|
Issue: [issue from state]
|
|
Current step: [step from state]
|
|
|
|
1. Resume from where we left off
|
|
2. Start fresh (archives existing session)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
- If it exists and `status` is `"complete"`: Ask whether to archive and start fresh.
|
|
|
|
### 2. Initialize state
|
|
|
|
Create `.smart-fix/` directory and `state.json`:
|
|
|
|
```json
|
|
{
|
|
"issue": "$ARGUMENTS",
|
|
"status": "in_progress",
|
|
"verification_level": "standard",
|
|
"prevention_focus": "immediate",
|
|
"current_step": 1,
|
|
"current_phase": 1,
|
|
"completed_steps": [],
|
|
"files_created": [],
|
|
"started_at": "ISO_TIMESTAMP",
|
|
"last_updated": "ISO_TIMESTAMP"
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Parse `$ARGUMENTS` for `--verification` and `--prevention` flags. Use defaults if not specified.
|
|
|
|
### 3. Parse issue description
|
|
|
|
Extract the issue description from `$ARGUMENTS` (everything before the flags). This is referenced as `$ISSUE` in prompts below.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 1: Issue Analysis (Steps 1-2)
|
|
|
|
### Step 1: Error Detection and Context Gathering
|
|
|
|
Use the Task tool to launch the error detective agent:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "error-detective"
|
|
description: "Analyze error context for: $ISSUE"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
Analyze error traces, logs, and observability data for: $ISSUE
|
|
|
|
Deliverables:
|
|
1. Error signature analysis: exception type, message patterns, frequency, first occurrence
|
|
2. Stack trace deep dive: failure location, call chain, involved components
|
|
3. Reproduction steps: minimal test case, environment requirements, data fixtures needed
|
|
4. Observability context:
|
|
- Sentry/DataDog error groups and trends
|
|
- Distributed traces showing request flow (OpenTelemetry/Jaeger)
|
|
- Structured logs (JSON logs with correlation IDs)
|
|
- APM metrics: latency spikes, error rates, resource usage
|
|
5. User impact assessment: affected user segments, error rate, business metrics impact
|
|
6. Timeline analysis: when did it start, correlation with deployments/config changes
|
|
7. Related symptoms: similar errors, cascading failures, upstream/downstream impacts
|
|
|
|
Modern debugging techniques to employ:
|
|
- AI-assisted log analysis (pattern detection, anomaly identification)
|
|
- Distributed trace correlation across microservices
|
|
- Production-safe debugging (no code changes, use observability data)
|
|
- Error fingerprinting for deduplication and tracking
|
|
|
|
Provide structured output with: ERROR_SIGNATURE, FREQUENCY, FIRST_SEEN, STACK_TRACE,
|
|
REPRODUCTION, OBSERVABILITY_LINKS, USER_IMPACT, TIMELINE, RELATED_ISSUES.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Save the agent's output to `.smart-fix/01-error-analysis.md`.
|
|
|
|
Update `state.json`: set `current_step` to 2, add step 1 to `completed_steps`.
|
|
|
|
### Step 2: Root Cause Identification
|
|
|
|
Read `.smart-fix/01-error-analysis.md` to load error context.
|
|
|
|
Use the Task tool to launch the debugger agent:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "debugger"
|
|
description: "Identify root cause for: $ISSUE"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
Perform root cause investigation using error-detective output:
|
|
|
|
Context from Error-Detective:
|
|
[Insert full contents of .smart-fix/01-error-analysis.md]
|
|
|
|
Deliverables:
|
|
1. Root cause hypothesis with supporting evidence
|
|
2. Code-level analysis: variable states, control flow, timing issues
|
|
3. Git bisect analysis: identify introducing commit (automate with git bisect run)
|
|
4. Dependency analysis: version conflicts, API changes, configuration drift
|
|
5. State inspection: database state, cache state, external API responses
|
|
6. Failure mechanism: why does the code fail under these specific conditions
|
|
7. Fix strategy options with tradeoffs (quick fix vs proper fix)
|
|
|
|
Context needed for next phase:
|
|
- Exact file paths and line numbers requiring changes
|
|
- Data structures or API contracts affected
|
|
- Dependencies that may need updates
|
|
- Test scenarios to verify the fix
|
|
- Performance characteristics to maintain
|
|
|
|
Provide structured output with: ROOT_CAUSE, INTRODUCING_COMMIT, AFFECTED_FILES,
|
|
FAILURE_MECHANISM, DEPENDENCIES, FIX_STRATEGY, TESTING_REQUIREMENTS.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Save the agent's output to `.smart-fix/02-root-cause.md`.
|
|
|
|
Update `state.json`: set `current_step` to "checkpoint-1", add step 2 to `completed_steps`.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## PHASE CHECKPOINT 1 — User Approval Required
|
|
|
|
You MUST stop here and present findings for review.
|
|
|
|
Display a summary from `.smart-fix/01-error-analysis.md` and `.smart-fix/02-root-cause.md` (error signature, root cause, fix strategy) and ask:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Issue analysis complete. Please review:
|
|
- .smart-fix/01-error-analysis.md (error context)
|
|
- .smart-fix/02-root-cause.md (root cause and fix strategy)
|
|
|
|
Root cause: [brief summary]
|
|
Recommended fix: [brief summary]
|
|
|
|
1. Approve — proceed to deep investigation and fix
|
|
2. Request changes — tell me what to adjust
|
|
3. Pause — save progress and stop here
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Do NOT proceed to Phase 2 until the user selects option 1. If they select option 2, revise and re-checkpoint. If option 3, update `state.json` status and stop.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 2: Deep Investigation (Steps 3-4)
|
|
|
|
### Step 3: Deep Code Analysis
|
|
|
|
Read `.smart-fix/01-error-analysis.md` and `.smart-fix/02-root-cause.md`.
|
|
|
|
Use the Task tool to launch the debugger agent:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "debugger"
|
|
description: "Deep code analysis for: $ISSUE"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
Perform deep code analysis and bisect investigation:
|
|
|
|
Context from Phase 1:
|
|
[Insert contents of .smart-fix/02-root-cause.md]
|
|
|
|
Deliverables:
|
|
1. Code path analysis: trace execution from entry point to failure
|
|
2. Variable state tracking: values at key decision points
|
|
3. Control flow analysis: branches taken, loops, async operations
|
|
4. Git bisect automation: create bisect script to identify exact breaking commit
|
|
5. Dependency compatibility matrix: version combinations that work/fail
|
|
6. Configuration analysis: environment variables, feature flags, deployment configs
|
|
7. Timing and race condition analysis: async operations, event ordering, locks
|
|
8. Memory and resource analysis: leaks, exhaustion, contention
|
|
|
|
Provide structured output with: CODE_PATH, STATE_AT_FAILURE, BISECT_RESULT,
|
|
DEPENDENCY_ISSUES, CONFIGURATION_DRIFT, RACE_CONDITIONS, ISOLATION_VERIFICATION.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Save output to `.smart-fix/03-deep-analysis.md`.
|
|
|
|
Update `state.json`: set `current_step` to 4, add step 3 to `completed_steps`.
|
|
|
|
### Step 4: Code Review Deep Dive
|
|
|
|
Read `.smart-fix/02-root-cause.md` and `.smart-fix/03-deep-analysis.md`.
|
|
|
|
Use the Task tool to launch the code reviewer agent:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "code-reviewer"
|
|
description: "Review code logic for: $ISSUE"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
Review code logic and identify design issues:
|
|
|
|
Context from Deep Analysis:
|
|
[Insert contents of .smart-fix/03-deep-analysis.md]
|
|
|
|
Deliverables:
|
|
1. Logic flaw analysis: incorrect assumptions, missing edge cases, wrong algorithms
|
|
2. Type safety gaps: where stronger types could prevent the issue
|
|
3. Error handling review: missing try-catch, unhandled promises, panic scenarios
|
|
4. Contract validation: input validation gaps, output guarantees not met
|
|
5. Architectural issues: tight coupling, missing abstractions, layering violations
|
|
6. Similar patterns: other code locations with same vulnerability
|
|
7. Fix design: minimal change vs refactoring vs architectural improvement
|
|
|
|
Review checklist:
|
|
- Are null/undefined values handled correctly?
|
|
- Are async operations properly awaited/chained?
|
|
- Are error cases explicitly handled?
|
|
- Are type assertions safe?
|
|
- Are API contracts respected?
|
|
- Are side effects isolated?
|
|
|
|
Provide structured output with: LOGIC_FLAWS, TYPE_SAFETY_GAPS, ERROR_HANDLING_GAPS,
|
|
SIMILAR_VULNERABILITIES, FIX_DESIGN, REFACTORING_OPPORTUNITIES, ARCHITECTURAL_CONCERNS.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Save output to `.smart-fix/04-code-review.md`.
|
|
|
|
Update `state.json`: set `current_step` to 5, add step 4 to `completed_steps`.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 3: Fix Implementation (Step 5)
|
|
|
|
### Step 5: Implement Fix
|
|
|
|
Read `.smart-fix/02-root-cause.md`, `.smart-fix/03-deep-analysis.md`, and `.smart-fix/04-code-review.md`.
|
|
|
|
Route to the appropriate agent based on the codebase language. Use `general-purpose` with role context for language-specific fixes:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "general-purpose"
|
|
description: "Implement fix for: $ISSUE"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
You are a senior software engineer. Implement a production-safe fix with comprehensive test coverage.
|
|
|
|
Context from investigation:
|
|
- Root cause: [Insert from .smart-fix/02-root-cause.md]
|
|
- Code review: [Insert from .smart-fix/04-code-review.md]
|
|
|
|
Deliverables:
|
|
1. Minimal fix implementation addressing root cause (not symptoms)
|
|
2. Unit tests: specific failure case reproduction, edge cases, error paths
|
|
3. Integration tests: end-to-end scenarios with real dependencies
|
|
4. Regression tests: tests for similar vulnerabilities found in code review
|
|
5. Production-safe practices:
|
|
- Feature flags for gradual rollout
|
|
- Graceful degradation if fix fails
|
|
- Structured logging for debugging
|
|
- Monitoring hooks for fix verification
|
|
|
|
Implementation requirements:
|
|
- Follow existing code patterns and conventions
|
|
- Add strategic debug logging (JSON structured logs)
|
|
- Include comprehensive type annotations
|
|
- Update error messages to be actionable
|
|
- Maintain backward compatibility
|
|
|
|
Report: FIX_SUMMARY, CHANGED_FILES, NEW_FILES, TEST_COVERAGE, TEST_RESULTS,
|
|
BREAKING_CHANGES, OBSERVABILITY_ADDITIONS, BACKWARD_COMPATIBILITY.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Save output to `.smart-fix/05-implementation.md`.
|
|
|
|
Update `state.json`: set `current_step` to "checkpoint-2", add step 5 to `completed_steps`.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## PHASE CHECKPOINT 2 — User Approval Required
|
|
|
|
Display a summary of the fix from `.smart-fix/05-implementation.md` and ask:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Fix implementation complete. Please review .smart-fix/05-implementation.md
|
|
|
|
Changes: [summary of files changed]
|
|
Tests: [summary of test coverage]
|
|
Breaking changes: [none or details]
|
|
|
|
1. Approve — proceed to verification
|
|
2. Request changes — tell me what to adjust
|
|
3. Pause — save progress and stop here
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Do NOT proceed to Phase 4 until the user approves.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 4: Verification (Steps 6-8)
|
|
|
|
### Step 6: Regression Testing
|
|
|
|
Read `.smart-fix/05-implementation.md`.
|
|
|
|
Use the Task tool to launch the test automator:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "test-automator"
|
|
description: "Regression testing for: $ISSUE fix"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
Run comprehensive regression testing and verify fix quality:
|
|
|
|
Context:
|
|
[Insert contents of .smart-fix/05-implementation.md]
|
|
|
|
Deliverables:
|
|
1. Full test suite execution: unit, integration, end-to-end, contract tests
|
|
2. Regression detection: compare results before/after, identify new failures
|
|
3. Test quality assessment: coverage metrics, test determinism
|
|
4. Security testing: auth checks, input validation, injection prevention
|
|
5. Cross-environment testing: staging/QA validation
|
|
|
|
Report: TEST_RESULTS, CODE_COVERAGE, REGRESSION_DETECTED, SECURITY_SCAN, TEST_QUALITY.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Step 7: Performance Validation
|
|
|
|
Read `.smart-fix/05-implementation.md`.
|
|
|
|
Launch in parallel with Step 6:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "general-purpose"
|
|
description: "Performance validation for: $ISSUE fix"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
You are a performance engineer. Measure performance impact and validate no regressions.
|
|
|
|
Context:
|
|
[Insert contents of .smart-fix/05-implementation.md]
|
|
|
|
Deliverables:
|
|
1. Performance benchmarks: response time (p50, p95, p99), throughput, resource utilization
|
|
2. Comparison with baseline: before/after metrics
|
|
3. Load testing: stress test, soak test for memory leaks, spike test
|
|
4. APM analysis: distributed trace analysis, slow query detection, N+1 patterns
|
|
5. Production readiness: capacity planning impact, scaling characteristics
|
|
|
|
Report: PERFORMANCE_BASELINE, PERFORMANCE_AFTER_FIX, PERFORMANCE_IMPACT,
|
|
LOAD_TEST_RESULTS, APM_INSIGHTS, PRODUCTION_READY.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Step 8: Security Review
|
|
|
|
Read `.smart-fix/05-implementation.md`.
|
|
|
|
Launch in parallel with Steps 6-7:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "general-purpose"
|
|
description: "Security review for: $ISSUE fix"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
You are a security auditor. Review the fix for security vulnerabilities.
|
|
|
|
Context:
|
|
[Insert contents of .smart-fix/05-implementation.md]
|
|
|
|
Review for: OWASP Top 10, authentication/authorization flaws, input validation gaps,
|
|
data protection issues, dependency vulnerabilities, and security anti-patterns.
|
|
|
|
Provide findings with severity, location, and specific fix recommendations.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
After all three complete, consolidate into `.smart-fix/06-verification.md`:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Verification: $ISSUE
|
|
|
|
## Test Results
|
|
|
|
[Summary from Step 6]
|
|
|
|
## Performance Validation
|
|
|
|
[Summary from Step 7]
|
|
|
|
## Security Review
|
|
|
|
[Summary from Step 8]
|
|
|
|
## Action Items
|
|
|
|
[Critical/high findings that need addressing]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
If there are Critical or High severity findings, address them before proceeding.
|
|
|
|
Update `state.json`: set `current_step` to "checkpoint-3", add steps 6-8 to `completed_steps`.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## PHASE CHECKPOINT 3 — User Approval Required
|
|
|
|
Display verification results from `.smart-fix/06-verification.md` and ask:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Verification complete. Please review .smart-fix/06-verification.md
|
|
|
|
Test results: [pass/fail summary]
|
|
Performance impact: [improved/neutral/degraded]
|
|
Security findings: [X critical, Y high, Z medium]
|
|
|
|
1. Approve — proceed to final review and documentation
|
|
2. Request changes — tell me what to fix
|
|
3. Pause — save progress and stop here
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Do NOT proceed to Phase 5 until the user approves.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 5: Final Review & Prevention (Steps 9-10)
|
|
|
|
### Step 9: Final Code Review
|
|
|
|
Read `.smart-fix/05-implementation.md` and `.smart-fix/06-verification.md`.
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "code-reviewer"
|
|
description: "Final review for: $ISSUE fix"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
Perform final code review and approve for deployment:
|
|
|
|
Implementation: [Insert contents of .smart-fix/05-implementation.md]
|
|
Verification: [Insert contents of .smart-fix/06-verification.md]
|
|
|
|
Deliverables:
|
|
1. Code quality review: conventions, patterns, error handling, observability
|
|
2. Architecture review: boundaries, coupling, scalability
|
|
3. Security review: vulnerabilities, validation, auth
|
|
4. Deployment readiness: rollback plan, feature flags, monitoring
|
|
5. Risk assessment: blast radius, rollout strategy, success metrics
|
|
|
|
Report: REVIEW_STATUS, DEPLOYMENT_RISK, ROLLBACK_PLAN, ROLLOUT_STRATEGY,
|
|
MONITORING_REQUIREMENTS, FINAL_VERDICT.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Save output to `.smart-fix/07-final-review.md`.
|
|
|
|
Update `state.json`: set `current_step` to 10, add step 9 to `completed_steps`.
|
|
|
|
### Step 10: Documentation & Prevention
|
|
|
|
Read all `.smart-fix/*.md` files.
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task:
|
|
subagent_type: "general-purpose"
|
|
description: "Document fix and prevention for: $ISSUE"
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
You are a technical writer and SRE specialist. Document the fix and implement prevention strategies.
|
|
|
|
Context:
|
|
[Insert contents of all .smart-fix/*.md files]
|
|
|
|
Deliverables:
|
|
1. Code documentation: inline comments for non-obvious logic, function docs
|
|
2. Operational documentation: CHANGELOG entry, release notes, runbook entry
|
|
3. Prevention through static analysis: linting rules, stricter type checking
|
|
4. Monitoring and alerting: error rate alerts, custom metrics, SLO dashboards
|
|
5. Architectural improvements: similar vulnerability patterns, refactoring proposals
|
|
6. Postmortem document (if high-severity): timeline, root cause, action items
|
|
|
|
Report: DOCUMENTATION_UPDATES, PREVENTION_MEASURES, MONITORING_ADDED,
|
|
ARCHITECTURAL_IMPROVEMENTS, SIMILAR_VULNERABILITIES, FOLLOW_UP_TASKS.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Save output to `.smart-fix/08-prevention.md`.
|
|
|
|
Update `state.json`: set `current_step` to "complete", add step 10 to `completed_steps`.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Completion
|
|
|
|
Update `state.json`:
|
|
|
|
- Set `status` to `"complete"`
|
|
- Set `last_updated` to current timestamp
|
|
|
|
Present the final summary:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Issue resolution complete: $ISSUE
|
|
|
|
## Files Created
|
|
[List all .smart-fix/ output files]
|
|
|
|
## Resolution Summary
|
|
- Error Analysis: .smart-fix/01-error-analysis.md
|
|
- Root Cause: .smart-fix/02-root-cause.md
|
|
- Deep Analysis: .smart-fix/03-deep-analysis.md
|
|
- Code Review: .smart-fix/04-code-review.md
|
|
- Implementation: .smart-fix/05-implementation.md
|
|
- Verification: .smart-fix/06-verification.md
|
|
- Final Review: .smart-fix/07-final-review.md
|
|
- Prevention: .smart-fix/08-prevention.md
|
|
|
|
## Next Steps
|
|
1. Review all generated code and documentation
|
|
2. Run the full test suite to verify everything passes
|
|
3. Create a pull request with the implementation
|
|
4. Deploy using the rollout strategy in .smart-fix/07-final-review.md
|
|
5. Monitor using the alerts configured in .smart-fix/08-prevention.md
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Issue to resolve: $ARGUMENTS
|