Workflow orchestrator for bug investigation and resolution. Chains specialized skills based on issue scope.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionfixExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches fix from parcadei/continuous-claude-v3 and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate fix. Access via /fix in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
0
total installs
0
this week
3.7K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
3.7K
stars
Workflow orchestrator for bug investigation and resolution. Chains specialized skills based on issue scope.
/fix <scope> [options] [description]
If the user types just /fix with no or partial arguments, guide them through this question flow. Use AskUserQuestion for each phase.
question: "What would you like to fix?"
header: "Fix type"
options:
- label: "Help me choose (Recommended)"
description: "I'll ask questions to pick the right fix workflow"
- label: "Bug - something is broken"
description: "Chain: investigate → diagnose → implement → test → commit"
- label: "Hook - Claude Code hook issue"
description: "Chain: debug-hooks → hook-developer → implement → test"
- label: "Dependencies - import/package errors"
description: "Chain: preflight → research → plan → implement → qlty-check"
- label: "PR Comments - address reviewer feedback"
description: "Chain: github-search → research → plan → implement → commit"
Mapping:
If Answer is Unclear (via "Other"):
question: "I want to understand what kind of fix you need. Did you mean..."
header: "Clarify"
options:
- label: "Help me choose"
description: "Not sure - guide me through questions"
- label: "Bug - something is broken"
description: "Code isn't working as expected"
- label: "Hook - Claude Code hook issue"
description: "Hooks not firing or producing wrong output"
- label: "Neither - let me explain differently"
description: "I'll describe my issue"
question: "What kind of issue are you dealing with?"
header: "Issue type"
options:
- label: "Something is broken/not working"
description: "Bug in the code"
- label: "Claude Code hook not firing"
description: "Hook-specific debugging"
- label: "Import/dependency errors"
description: "Package or module issues"
- label: "Need to address PR feedback"
description: "Reviewer comments to fix"
Mapping:
question: "Can you describe the issue?"
header: "Details"
options: [] # Free text - user describes the problem
Capture the error message, unexpected behavior, or PR link.
question: "How should I investigate?"
header: "Investigation"
options:
- label: "Diagnose and fix"
description: "Find the problem and implement a fix"
- label: "Diagnose only (dry run)"
description: "Just tell me what's wrong, don't change code"
- label: "Quick fix"
description: "I know the issue, just fix it fast"
Mapping:
question: "After fixing, should I..."
header: "After fix"
multiSelect: true
options:
- label: "Write a regression test"
description: "Prevent this bug from recurring"
- label: "Commit the fix"
description: "Create a git commit"
- label: "Just fix, nothing else"
description: "I'll handle tests and git"
Mapping:
Based on your answers, I'll run:
**Scope:** bug
**Issue:** "Login button not responding on Safari"
**Chain:** sleuth (investigate) → spark (fix) → arbiter (test) → commit
**Options:** (none)
Proceed? [Yes / Adjust settings]
| Scope | Chain | Description |
|---|---|---|
bug |
debug -> implement_task -> test-driven-development -> commit | General bug fix workflow |
hook |
debug-hooks -> hook-developer -> implement_task -> test hook | Hook-specific debugging |
deps |
dependency-preflight -> oracle -> plan-agent -> implement_plan -> qlty-check | Dependency issues |
pr-comments |
github-search -> research-codebase -> plan-agent -> implement_plan -> commit | Address PR feedback |
| Option | Effect |
|---|---|
--no-test |
Skip regression test creation |
--dry-run |
Diagnose only, don't implement fix |
--no-commit |
Don't auto-commit the fix |
# Parse scope and options
SCOPE="${1:-bug}"
NO_TEST=false
DRY_RUN=false
NO_COMMIT=false
for arg in "$@"; do
case $arg in
--no-test) NO_TEST=true ;;
--dry-run) DRY_RUN=true ;;
--no-commit) NO_COMMIT=true ;;
esac
done
Spawn sleuth agent for parallel investigation:
Task(
subagent_type="sleuth",
prompt="""
Investigate this issue in parallel:
1. **Logs**: Check recent logs for errors
- Application logs
- System logs if relevant
- Build/test output
2. **Database State** (if applicable):
- Check for stuck/invalid records
- Verify schema matches expectations
3. **Git State**:
- Recent commits that might relate
- Uncommitted changes
- Current branch context
4. **Runtime State**:
- Running processes
- Port conflicts
- Environment variables
Issue description: {user_description}
Return structured findings with evidence.
"""
)
Present findings to user:
## Diagnosis Report
### Scope: {scope}
### Evidence Found
**Logs:**
- [Finding with timestamp/line reference]
**Database:**
- [Finding with table/query reference]
**Git State:**
- [Recent relevant commits]
- [Uncommitted changes]
**Runtime:**
- [Process/port findings]
### Root Cause Analysis
**Primary Hypothesis:** [Most likely cause based on evidence]
**Supporting Evidence:**
1. [Evidence 1]
2. [Evidence 2]
**Alternative Hypotheses:**
- [Alternative 1]: [Why less likely]
### Proposed Fix
**Approach:** [How to fix]
**Files to Modify:**
- `path/to/file.ts:123` - [Change description]
**Risk Assessment:** [Low/Medium/High] - [Why]
---
**Proceed with fix?** (yes/no/modify approach)
REQUIRED: Wait for user confirmation before implementing.
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
parcadei/continuous-claude-v3
mattpocock/skills
cursor/plugins
ailabs-393/ai-labs-claude-skills
pproenca/dot-skills
mattpocock/skills
fix reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
Registry listing for fix matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
Registry listing for fix matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
Useful defaults in fix — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: fix is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: fix is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
I recommend fix for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
We added fix from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
Keeps context tight: fix is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
I recommend fix for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
showing 1-10 of 50