Debug Like an Expert
Core principle: VERIFY, DON'T ASSUME. Code you wrote deserves extra skepticism.
Phase 1: EVIDENCE GATHERING
- Document exact error (full message, stack trace)
- Identify affected components
- Check recent changes (
git diff,git log) - Research error via context7 MCP if needed
Output: Evidence summary Gate: Have reproducible steps before proceeding
Phase 2: ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS
- Form 2-3 testable hypotheses
- Test ONE variable at a time
- Read complete files, not snippets
- Chase dependencies to their source
Output: Identified root cause with evidence Gate: Can explain WHY the bug occurs
Phase 3: SOLUTION
- Implement minimal fix
- Verify fix addresses root cause (not symptoms)
- Test original reproduction steps
- Check for regressions
Output: Working fix with verification
Rules
- No fixes without explaining WHY they work
- Never assume - verify every assumption
- Test one change at a time
- Would this fix survive code review?