Free SKILL.md scraped from GitHub. Clone the repo or copy the file directly into your Claude Code skills directory.
npx versuz@latest install parslee-ai-neo-plugins-neo-skills-neo-debuggit clone https://github.com/Parslee-ai/neo.gitcp neo/SKILL.MD ~/.claude/skills/parslee-ai-neo-plugins-neo-skills-neo-debug/SKILL.md--- name: neo-debug description: Ask Neo to help debug intermittent, complex, or hard-to-reproduce issues. Particularly useful for race conditions, memory issues, distributed-systems bugs, and cases where the symptom is not the root cause. --- # Neo Debug Assistant When the user invokes this skill (`$neo-debug <bug description>`), do the following: 1. **Capture the bug context tightly.** Symptom, when it started, frequency, environment, and any reproduction steps. Vague bug reports get vague answers; Neo's memory is keyed on specifics. 2. **Gather observable evidence.** Recent error logs, stack traces, test failures. Read the file(s) implicated by the stack trace. If the user mentioned a specific function, locate it. 3. **Invoke Neo with a debug-framed prompt.** Allow up to 5 minutes. ```bash neo <<'QUERY' Debug this issue: <user's description> Symptoms: <what happens> Environment: <relevant context — concurrency model, OS, runtime, dependencies> Stack trace / logs: <paste evidence> Relevant code: <paste the function or module under suspicion> Provide ranked hypotheses about root cause with reasoning. For each, suggest a verification step. QUERY ``` 4. **Present Neo's hypotheses ranked by confidence.** Lead with the verification step the user can take next — debugging is an iterative loop, not a one-shot answer. 5. **If Neo returns multiple competing hypotheses, surface them all.** Don't collapse to "the most likely one" — concurrent-systems bugs often have multiple contributing causes. ## Notes - Race conditions, memory issues, and intermittent failures are where Neo's failure-pattern memory pays off most — past similar bugs add weight to matching hypotheses. - If Neo's top hypothesis has confidence < 0.6, treat it as "worth investigating" rather than "probably right." Debugging is harder than greenfield reasoning; lower confidence is normal.