Ln Diagnose

Debug by scientific method: trusted repro loop, falsifiable hypotheses, one-variable probes, regression oracle. Do not fix by inspection unless the cause is already proven.

Input

Bug, failure, flake, or regression to diagnose: $ARGUMENTS

Orient first:

1. Read memory/SPEC.md if present; use its lexicon and live invariants.
2. Read memory/PLAN.md if present; identify the containing frontier item if one exists.
3. Read HANDOFF.md if present.
4. For runtime/UI failures, read the relevant project praxis doc before inspecting logs or driving browsers.

Write a 2-4 bullet orientation note: symptom, suspected seam, current feedback loop, proof standard.

1. Build the repro loop

This is the skill. A fast deterministic pass/fail loop makes the rest mechanical. No loop, no diagnosis.

Try, in rough order:

1. failing unit/integration/e2e test at the seam that reaches the bug
2. CLI/script with fixture input and asserted output
3. HTTP/curl script against a running server
4. browser automation asserting DOM, console, or network
5. replayed artifact: request, trace, event log, fixture, HAR
6. throwaway harness around the smallest subsystem that exercises the path
7. property/fuzz loop for intermittent wrong output
8. bisection/differential loop across commits, versions, datasets, or configs
9. structured HITL loop only when a human must observe or click

Improve the loop before moving on: faster, sharper assertion, less flake. Pin time, randomness, network, filesystem, and concurrency. For nondeterministic bugs, raise reproduction rate with repetition/stress until it is debuggable.

If no loop can be built, stop. Report what you tried and ask for access, logs, traces, fixtures, timestamped recordings, or permission for temporary instrumentation.

2. Reproduce the user's bug

Run the loop. Confirm it demonstrates the reported bug, not a nearby failure.

Capture:

• command/script/test used
• exact symptom: error, diff, timing, screenshot, console/network evidence
• reproduction rate for flakes
• saved replay artifact, if any

Lack of reproduction is allowed only as an explicit diagnosis result.

3. Rank falsifiable hypotheses

Generate 3-5 hypotheses before testing any one of them. Each hypothesis must predict an observation:

If [cause] is true, then [probe/change] will make [specific observation] happen.

Prefer hypotheses that distinguish seams or invariants from memory/SPEC.md. Show the ranking to the user when they are present; proceed if they are AFK.

4. Probe one variable at a time

Every probe maps to one prediction. Prefer debugger/REPL inspection, then targeted boundary logs, then temporary assertions/counters.

Tag temporary instrumentation with a unique prefix like [DEBUG-a4f2]. Cleanup must be grep-able. Never "log everything and grep".

Performance branch: measure first. Establish a baseline timing/profiler/query-plan signal, then bisect or compare. Do not optimize before the measurement identifies the seam.

5. Choose the fix route

Before coding, choose the route:

• Direct fix / ln-build — cause is proven and the change stays inside a settled seam.
• ln-scope or ln-spec — the fix changes a seam, invariant, requirement, assumption, or frontier shape.
• ln-spike or ln-design — diagnosis answered one question but the fix shape remains uncertain.
• ln-review / ln-refactor — no correct regression seam exists, or architecture contributed to the bug.

Install the regression oracle before the fix when a correct seam exists. A correct seam reproduces the real bug pattern as it occurs at the call site. Shallow tests that cannot fail for the original bug are false confidence.

6. Cleanup and postmortem

Before declaring done:

• original repro loop no longer reproduces the bug, or non-repro is the diagnosis
• regression oracle exists and passes, or absence of a correct seam is documented
• all [DEBUG-...] instrumentation is removed
• throwaway harnesses are deleted or visibly temporary
• confirmed causal hypothesis is stated in the report / commit message

Ask: what would have prevented this bug? Route missing invariants, unclear seams, weak oracles, and bad module shapes into the appropriate ln-* skill.

Canonical reconciliation

Reconcile only durable truth:

• New/retired assumption → update memory/SPEC.md §Assumptions.
• New seam-level invariant or oracle gap → update memory/SPEC.md or route to ln-oracles.
• Frontier status changed → update memory/PLAN.md.
• Local bug with no durable implication → no canonical update beyond tracked PLAN status.

Do not create CONTEXT.md, ADRs, or alternate planning docs. Canonical docs are memory/SPEC.md and memory/PLAN.md.

Output

## Diagnosis: [symptom]

**Repro loop:** [command/script/test and reproduction rate]
**Confirmed cause:** [one sentence]
**Evidence:** [key observations]
**Fix route:** [direct fix | ln-scope | ln-build | ln-spike | ln-review | ln-refactor]
**Regression oracle:** [test/harness or why unavailable]
**Canonical updates:** [none | specific SPEC/PLAN changes needed]

Routing

After diagnosis, present these options to the user (use tool-ask-question):

#	Label	Target	Why
1	Scope the fix	ln-scope	The fix needs a buildable card or durable seam update
2	Build the fix	ln-build	The fix is settled and ready for red-green-refactor
3	Spike deeper	ln-spike	A hard question remains after reproduction
4	Review structure	ln-review	No good seam/regression oracle exists or architecture contributed
5	Back to triage	ln-consult	Diagnosis changed priority or scope

Recommended: 2 only when cause and seam are proven; otherwise 1.

---

Adapted from mattpocock/skills/engineering/diagnose.