fix-issue（解决问题）

[IMPORTANT] Use TaskCreate to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.

Understand Code First — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code. 1. Search 3+ similar patterns (grep/glob) — cite file:line evidence 2. Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions 3. Run python.claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --json when .code-graph/graph.db exists 4. Map dependencies via connections or callers_of — know what depends on your target 5. Write investigation to .ai/workspace/analysis/ for non-trivial tasks (3+ files) 6. Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone 7. NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation BLOCKED until: - [] Read target files - [] Grep 3+ patterns - [] Graph trace (if graph.db exists) - [] Assumptions verified with evidence

Evidence-Based Reasoning — Speculation is FORBIDDEN. Every claim needs proof. 1. Cite file:line, grep results, or framework docs for EVERY claim 2. Declare confidence: >80% act freely, 60-80% verify first, <60% DO NOT recommend 3. Cross-service validation required for architectural changes 4. "I don't have enough evidence" is valid and expected output BLOCKED until: - [] Evidence file path (file:line) - [] Grep search performed - [] 3+ similar patterns found - [] Confidence level stated Forbidden without proof: "obviously", "I think", "should be", "probably", "this is because" If incomplete → output: "Insufficient evidence. Verified: [...]. Not verified: [...]."

• docs/project-reference/domain-entities-reference.md — Domain entity catalog, relationships, cross-service sync (read when task involves business entities/models) (content auto-injected by hook — check for [Injected:...] header before reading)

Estimation — Modified Fibonacci: 1(trivial) → 2(small) → 3(medium) → 5(large) → 8(very large) → 13(epic, SHOULD split) → 21(MUST ATTENTION split). Output story_points and complexity in plan frontmatter. Complexity auto-derived: 1-2=Low, 3-5=Medium, 8=High, 13+=Critical.

Skill Variant: Variant of /fix — debug and fix GitHub issues with systematic investigation.

Quick Summary

Goal: Investigate and fix bugs reported as GitHub issues with full traceability.

Workflow:

1. Fetch — Read GitHub issue details (title, description, reproduction steps)
2. Reproduce — Trace the reported behavior in code
3. Fix — Apply fix with root cause evidence

Key Rules:

• Debug Mindset: every claim needs file:line evidence
• Link fix back to the GitHub issue for traceability
• Verify fix addresses the specific reproduction steps from the issue

Root Cause Debugging — Systematic approach, never guess-and-check. 1. Reproduce — Confirm the issue exists with evidence (error message, stack trace, screenshot) 2. Isolate — Narrow to specific file/function/line using binary search + graph trace 3. Trace — Follow data flow from input to failure point. Read actual code, don't infer. 4. Hypothesize — Form theory with confidence %. State what evidence supports/contradicts it 5. Verify — Test hypothesis with targeted grep/read. One variable at a time. 6. Fix — Address root cause, not symptoms. Verify fix doesn't break callers via graph connections NEVER: Guess without evidence. Fix symptoms instead of cause. Skip reproduction step.

$ARGUMENTS

Debug Mindset (NON-NEGOTIABLE)

Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).

• Do NOT assume the first hypothesis is correct — verify with actual code traces
• Every root cause claim must include file:line evidence
• If you cannot prove a root cause with a code trace, state "hypothesis, not confirmed"
• Question assumptions: "Is this really the cause?" → trace the actual execution path
• Challenge completeness: "Are there other contributing factors?" → check related code paths
• No "should fix it" without proof — verify the fix addresses the traced root cause

⚠️ MANDATORY: Confidence & Evidence Gate

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION declare Confidence: X% with evidence list + file:line proof for EVERY claim. 95%+ recommend freely | 80-94% with caveats | 60-79% list unknowns | <60% STOP — gather more evidence.

⚠️ Validate Before Fix (NON-NEGOTIABLE): After root cause analysis, MUST ATTENTION present findings + proposed fix to user via AskUserQuestion and get explicit approval BEFORE any code changes. No silent fixes.

Activate debug-investigate skill and follow its workflow.

IMPORTANT: Always use external memory at .ai/workspace/analysis/issue-[number].analysis.md for structured analysis. Re-read ENTIRE analysis file before proposing any fix — this prevents knowledge loss.

🛑 Present root cause + proposed fix → AskUserQuestion → wait for user approval before implementing.

See .claude/docs/AI-DEBUGGING-PROTOCOL.md for comprehensive guidelines.

⚠️ MANDATORY: Post-Fix Verification

After applying the fix, MUST ATTENTION run /prove-fix — build code proof traces per change with confidence scores. Never skip.

Standalone Review Gate (Non-Workflow Only)

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION: If this skill is called outside a workflow (standalone /fix-issue), you MUST ATTENTION create a TaskCreate todo task for /review-changes as the last task in your task list. This ensures all changes are reviewed before commit even without a workflow enforcing it. If already running inside a workflow (e.g., bugfix), skip this — the workflow sequence handles /review-changes at the appropriate step.

Closing Reminders

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION validate decisions with user via AskUserQuestion — never auto-decide. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ the following files before starting:

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE any modification. Run graph trace when graph.db exists.
• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim. Confidence >80% to act, <60% = do NOT recommend.
• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include story_points and complexity in plan frontmatter. SP > 8 = split.