bug-fix

Bug Fix

Overview

Diagnose and fix bugs using a 4-agent pipeline: two diagnostic agents analyze the problem in parallel, a specialist writes the fix, and a code reviewer verifies quality.

Announce at start: "I'm using the zenflow:bug-fix skill to diagnose and fix this issue."

The Process

Step 1: Reproduce and Confirm

Before launching agents, confirm the bug:

• Reproduce the error (run the failing command, test, or scenario)
• Capture the actual error output
• Note the expected vs actual behavior
• If the bug cannot be reproduced, stop and report this to the user

Step 2: Parallel Diagnosis

Launch two agents in parallel via Agent tool:

Agent 1 — error-detective (subagent_type: error-detective)

• Trace the error to its root cause
• Identify the exact file(s) and line(s) responsible
• Distinguish symptom from cause
• Report: root cause, affected files, reproduction steps

Agent 2 — error-coordinator (subagent_type: error-coordinator)

• Check if this error is part of a pattern (similar errors elsewhere)
• Look for cascade potential (will fixing this break something else?)
• Check recent git history for related changes that may have introduced the bug
• Report: related errors, cascade risk, recent changes that may be relevant

Step 3: Determine Specialist

Based on diagnostic results, select the specialist agent type:

1. Config first — read agents array from .claude/zen.local.md, match the affected file path against each entry's dir, use that entry's agent field
2. Discovery fallback — if no config match, glob .claude/agents/*.md and ~/.claude/agents/*.md, read each file's name and description, match the bug's location and domain to the most relevant agent
3. Final fallback — use general-purpose

Inform the user which agent was selected and why. If falling back to discovery or default:

"No config match for this bug domain — using [agent]. Run /zenflow:init to generate agent assignments, or add an entry to your zen.local.md config."

Step 4: Fix

Launch the specialist agent with:

• Both diagnostic reports (detective + coordinator findings)
• The reproduction steps from Step 1
• Clear instructions:

The specialist must:

1. Write a regression test first that fails without the fix
2. Run the test to confirm it fails
3. Implement the minimal fix — no refactoring, no gold plating
4. Run the test to confirm it passes
5. Run the project's full test suite to confirm no regressions
6. Report: what was changed, why, files modified

Step 5: Review

Launch a code-reviewer agent (subagent_type: Code Reviewer) with:

• The specialist's report
• The diagnostic reports for context
• Git diff of the fix

The reviewer checks:

• Fix addresses root cause (not just symptom)
• No unnecessary changes beyond the fix
• Regression test actually covers the bug
• No new issues introduced

If the reviewer finds issues: send feedback to the specialist agent to fix, then re-review.

Step 6: Validate

Run zenflow:check-work skill to pass all quality gates.

STUCK Criteria

Declare STUCK — do not keep retrying — when:

• Same failure after 2 genuinely different fix approaches
• Root cause is outside this codebase (external dependency, infrastructure)
• Diagnostic agents disagree on root cause and neither can be confirmed
• Fix requires architectural changes beyond a bug fix scope

When marking STUCK, report:

• What was tried
• Where it failed
• What a human needs to decide

Remember

• Reproduce before diagnosing
• Diagnose before fixing (detective + coordinator in parallel)
• Regression test before fix code (TDD)
• Minimal fix — no gold plating
• Review before shipping
• STUCK after 2 failed approaches

Related Skills

• zenflow:check-work — Required at Step 6; runs all quality gates
• zenflow:review — Template for the review step
• error-detective — Root cause analysis agent
• error-coordinator — Error correlation and cascade detection agent