本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

bug-receipt

Close defects and incidents with a BUG RECEIPT and VERIFIED, PARTIAL, or BLOCKED status after diagnosis, repair, or recovery.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(5)

  • SKILL.md4.3 KB
  • assets/receipt.template.json573 B
  • references/receipt-contract.md1.8 KB
  • references/receipt.schema.json3.5 KB
  • scripts/validate-receipt.mjs7.7 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Bug Receipt

Mandatory closeout output

For every bug or incident closeout decision, return the complete receipt below as the entire user-facing result, even when the user requests a concise reply or does not name this format. Concision shortens field values; it never removes or renames a row. Do not replace the receipt with prose.

BUG RECEIPT · VERIFIED | PARTIAL | BLOCKED

Problem    <observed defect and intended behavior>
Baseline   <failing interaction or command and decisive result; or not run>
Root cause <proven mechanism; or unproven hypothesis>
Change     <responsible change; or none>
Proof      <supplied or executed check: result; include every decisive layer>
Gaps       <none; or exact missing proof and single next experiment/package>
Source     executed now | supplied | mixed

Use not run, unproven, or none explicitly. Never omit a row to make the receipt look complete.

Establish the evidence boundary

Before editing, record the observed problem, intended behavior, strongest direct check, and evidence source: executed now, supplied, or mixed. Never imply that supplied evidence was executed in the current run.

Keep evidence privacy-minimal. Redact credentials, tokens, cookies, personal data, private URLs, and sensitive payloads; preserve only the identifiers and excerpts needed to reproduce or correlate the failure.

Reproduce the failure with the narrowest safe check when possible. If reproduction is unavailable, preserve the evidence obtained and cap the result at PARTIAL or BLOCKED.

Trace and repair

  1. Follow the live owner path from input to symptom.
  2. Separate observed facts, bounded inferences, and gaps.
  3. Require a concrete location or runtime transition before naming root cause.
  4. Make the smallest responsible change; avoid unrelated cleanup, retries, silent fallbacks, and fixture-specific exceptions.

Do not convert a plausible patch, stale log, source read, or passing build into proof of the user-visible behavior.

Close the proof loop

Run only checks required by the affected contract:

  • original reproduction or direct acceptance check;
  • nearest negative or regression check;
  • affected build or integration gate;
  • real UI, API, persistence, concurrency, or runtime path when the claim crosses that boundary.

Use these decisive boundaries:

SurfaceRequired direct proof
Logic or failing testOriginal failing input or focused test now passes
UI behaviorReal interaction plus relevant console and network observation
API or integrationRequest, response, and responsible service behavior
PersistenceWrite/read or reload round trip through the real owner path
Race or lifecycleRepeated concurrent trigger; zero-or-one success; affected-row and transaction evidence; final invariant
Cross-system blockerOne sanitized failing request/response with timestamp or request ID, edge and application logs, and identity-provider logs when the trace reaches that owner

Assign status

  • VERIFIED: observed baseline, concrete cause, responsible change, all declared checks passed, no material gap.
  • PARTIAL: useful evidence exists, but a required proof layer is missing or inconclusive.
  • BLOCKED: a specific external condition prevents reproduction, repair, or proof.

For PARTIAL or BLOCKED, name the single minimal experiment or correlated evidence package that closes the decisive gap. Never invent a command, observation, count, location, or result.

For a machine-readable receipt or CI integration, read references/receipt-contract.md and conform to its JSON fields, evidence-source marker, compatibility rule, and status invariants.

When a JSON artifact is requested, start from assets/receipt.template.json, write it to a task-owned path, and validate it with node scripts/validate-receipt.mjs <receipt.json> from this skill directory. Do not commit the generated receipt unless the user requests it.

Source and license

Originally published at https://github.com/lMysticl/bug-receipt under the MIT License.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use this skill when the user explicitly asks to map, document, or onboard into an existing codebase. Trigger for prompts like "map this codebase", "document this architecture", "onboard me to this repo", or "create codebase docs". Do not trigger for routine feature implementation, bug fixes, or narrow code edits unless the user asks for repository-level discovery.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

github/awesome-copilot4万2026年10月9日 更新

Run the AgentRC readiness assessment on the current repository and produce a static HTML dashboard at reports/index.html. Wraps `npx github:microsoft/agentrc readiness` and hands off rendering to the @ai-readiness-reporter custom agent. Supports policies (--policy) for org-specific scoring. Use when asked to assess, audit, or score the AI readiness of a repo.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

github/awesome-copilot4万2026年10月9日 更新

Generate tailored AI agent instruction files via AgentRC instructions command. Produces .github/copilot-instructions.md (default, recommended for Copilot in VS Code) plus optional per-area .instructions.md files with applyTo globs for monorepos. Use after running /acreadiness-assess to close gaps in the AI Tooling pillar.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

github/awesome-copilot4万2026年10月9日 更新

Help the user pick, write, or apply an AgentRC policy. Policies customise readiness scoring by disabling irrelevant checks, overriding impact/level, setting pass-rate thresholds, or chaining org baselines with team overrides. Use when the user asks about strict mode, AI-only scoring, custom weights, CI gating, or wants org-wide standardisation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

github/awesome-copilot4万2026年10月9日 更新

Use this skill when the user shares ad campaign performance data and asks what to cut, scale, or test. Trigger for prompts like "analyze my ad campaigns", "where am I wasting ad spend", "reallocate my ad budget", "which ads are actually working", or "ROAS analysis". Do not trigger for campaign planning or creative generation without performance data.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

github/awesome-copilot4万2026年10月9日 更新

Add educational comments to the file specified, or prompt asking for file to comment if one is not provided.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

github/awesome-copilot4万2026年10月9日 更新

github のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する