本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

hypothesis-testing

Applies the scientific method to debugging by helping users form specific, testable hypotheses, design targeted experiments, and systematically confirm or reject theories to find root causes. Use when a user says their code isn't working, they're getting an error, something broke, they want to troubleshoot a bug, or they're trying to figure out what's causing an issue. Concrete actions include isolating failing components, forming and testing hypotheses, analyzing error messages, tracing execution paths, and interpreting test results to narrow down root causes.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.2 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。

Hypothesis-Driven Debugging

You are applying the scientific method to debugging. Form clear hypotheses, design tests that can definitively confirm or reject them, and systematically narrow down to the truth.

Core Principle

Every debugging action should test a specific hypothesis. Random changes are not debugging.

The Scientific Debugging Method

1. Observe - Gather Facts

Before forming hypotheses, collect observations:

  • What exactly happens? (specific symptoms)
  • When does it happen? (timing, frequency)
  • Where does it happen? (environment, component)
  • What changed recently? (code, config, data)

Write down observations objectively:

Observations:
- API returns 500 error on POST /orders
- Happens only when cart has > 10 items
- Started after deployment on 2024-01-15
- Works fine in staging environment
- Error logs show "connection refused" to inventory service

2. Hypothesize - Form Testable Theories

Examples (bad → good):

  • "Something is wrong with the network" → "The inventory service connection pool is exhausted when processing orders with >10 items"
  • "There might be a race condition" → "The order processing timeout (5s) is insufficient for large orders"

3. Predict - Define Expected Results

For each hypothesis, define what you expect to observe if it is true versus false:

Hypothesis: Connection pool exhausted for large orders

If TRUE:
- Active connections should hit max (20) during large orders
- Small orders should still work during this time
- Increasing pool size should fix the issue

If FALSE:
- Connection count stays well below max
- Small orders also fail during the issue
- Pool size change has no effect

4. Test - Experiment Systematically

Design tests that definitively confirm or reject:

Test Plan for Connection Pool Hypothesis:

1. Add connection pool monitoring
   - Log active connections before/after each request
   - Expected if true: Count reaches 20 during failures

2. Artificial stress test
   - Send 5 large orders simultaneously
   - Expected if true: Failures start when pool exhausted

3. Increase pool size to 50
   - Repeat stress test
   - Expected if true: Failures stop or threshold moves

4. Control test with small orders
   - Send 20 small orders simultaneously
   - Expected if true: No failures (faster processing)

5. Analyze - Interpret Results

After testing:

  • Did results match predictions for TRUE or FALSE?
  • Are results conclusive or ambiguous?
  • Do results suggest a different hypothesis?
Results:
- Connection count reached 20/20 during failures ✓
- Small orders succeeded during same period ✓
- Pool size increase to 50 → failures stopped ✓

Conclusion: Hypothesis CONFIRMED
Connection pool exhaustion is the proximate cause.

New question: Why do large orders exhaust the pool?
New hypothesis: Large orders make multiple inventory calls per item

Hypothesis Tracking Template

## Bug: [Description]

### Hypothesis 1: [Theory]
**Status:** Testing | Confirmed | Rejected
**Probability:** High | Medium | Low

**Evidence For:**
- [Evidence 1]
- [Evidence 2]

**Evidence Against:**
- [Evidence 1]

**Test Plan:**
1. [Test 1] - Expected result if true
2. [Test 2] - Expected result if false

**Test Results:**
- [Result 1]: [Supports/Contradicts]
- [Result 2]: [Supports/Contradicts]

**Conclusion:** [Confirmed/Rejected] because [reasoning]

---

### Hypothesis 2: [Next Theory]
...

Testing Techniques by Hypothesis Type

Testing Timing Hypotheses

// Add timing instrumentation
const start = performance.now();
await suspectedSlowOperation();
const duration = performance.now() - start;
console.log(`Operation took ${duration}ms`);
// Hypothesis confirmed if duration > expected

Testing Data Hypotheses

// Validate data at key points
function processWithValidation(data) {
  console.assert(data.id != null, 'Missing id');
  console.assert(data.items?.length > 0, 'Empty items');
  console.assert(typeof data.total === 'number', 'Invalid total');
  // If assertions fail, data hypothesis likely true
}

Testing State Hypotheses

// Snapshot state before and after
const stateBefore = JSON.stringify(currentState);
suspectedStateMutation();
const stateAfter = JSON.stringify(currentState);
if (stateBefore !== stateAfter) {
  console.log('State changed:', diff(stateBefore, stateAfter));
}

Decision Tree

Is the hypothesis testable?
├── NO → Refine it to be more specific
└── YES → Can I test it without side effects?
    ├── NO → Design a safe test (staging, logs-only)
    └── YES → Run the test
        └── Results conclusive?
            ├── NO → Design a better test
            └── YES → Hypothesis confirmed or rejected?
                ├── CONFIRMED → Root cause found?
                │   ├── YES → Fix and verify
                │   └── NO → Form next hypothesis (why?)
                └── REJECTED → Form next hypothesis

Integration with Other Skills

  • root-cause-analysis: Hypothesis testing is a key technique within RCA
  • trace-and-isolate: Use tracing to gather evidence for hypotheses
  • testing/red-green-refactor: Write test that confirms the bug before fixing

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

Guides the creation of technical design documents before writing code, producing architecture diagrams, data models, API interface definitions, implementation plans, and multi-option trade-off analyses. Use when the user asks to plan a feature, architect a system, design an API, explore implementation approaches, or requests a technical design or spec before coding — especially for complex features involving multiple components, ambiguous requirements, or significant architectural changes.

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。

rohitg00/skillkit1,5472026年6月2日 更新

Discovers, searches, and installs skills from multiple AI agent skill marketplaces (400K+ skills) using the SkillKit CLI. Supports browsing official partner collections (Anthropic, Vercel, Supabase, Stripe, and more) and community repositories, searching by domain or technology, and installing specific skills from GitHub. Use when the user wants to find, browse, or install new agent skills, plugins, extensions, or add-ons; asks 'is there a skill for X' or 'find a skill for X'; wants to explore a skill store or marketplace; needs to extend agent capabilities in areas like React, testing, DevOps, security, or APIs; or says 'browse skills', 'search skill marketplace', 'install a skill', or 'what skills are available'.

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。

rohitg00/skillkit1,5472026年6月2日 更新

Manages work transitions between team members or agents by creating structured handoff documents, summarizing project status, documenting key decisions, blockers, and open questions, and generating onboarding briefs. Use when someone needs to hand off, hand over, or transition a project; pass work to another person or agent; brief a colleague taking over; prepare a shift change summary; or onboard someone mid-task. Produces ready-to-use handoff documents covering current status, next steps, known issues, technical context, and communication templates for both planned and unplanned transfers.

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。

rohitg00/skillkit1,5472026年6月2日 更新

Coordinates parallel investigation threads to simultaneously explore multiple hypotheses or root causes across different system areas. Use when debugging production incidents, slow API performance, multi-system integration failures, or complex bugs where the root cause is unclear and multiple plausible theories exist; when serial troubleshooting is too slow; or when multiple investigators can divide root-cause analysis work. Provides structured phases for problem decomposition, thread assignment, sync points with Continue/Pivot/Converge decisions, and final report synthesis.

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。

rohitg00/skillkit1,5472026年6月2日 更新

Guides the red-green-refactor TDD workflow: write a failing test first, implement the minimum code to make it pass, then refactor while keeping tests green. Use when a user asks to practice TDD, write tests first, follow red-green-refactor, do test-driven development, write failing tests before code, or phrases like 'make the test pass', 'test coverage', or 'unit tests before implementation'.

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。

rohitg00/skillkit1,5472026年6月2日 更新

Performs systematic root cause analysis to identify the true source of bugs, errors, and unexpected behavior through structured investigation phases — not just treating symptoms. Use when a user reports a bug, crash, error, or broken behavior and needs to debug, troubleshoot, or investigate why something is not working; especially for complex or intermittent issues across multiple components. Applies the Five Whys method, hypothesis-driven testing, stack trace analysis, git blame/log evidence gathering, and causal chain documentation to isolate and confirm root causes before applying any fix.

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。

rohitg00/skillkit1,5472026年6月2日 更新

rohitg00 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する