write-bug-report

Write a bug report for $ARGUMENTS.

Systematic Investigation (MANDATORY — 4 phases before writing)

Do not write the bug report from the description alone. Investigate first. Every bug report is only as useful as the evidence behind it.

Phase 1: Evidence Gathering

1. Read the error message. Read it again. What does it actually say? Copy it verbatim — never paraphrase
2. Reproduce the bug. If you cannot reproduce it, you cannot report it accurately. Document the exact steps that trigger the failure
3. Check recent changes: git log --oneline -20 — did something change recently that correlates with the symptom?
4. Gather diagnostic evidence at every component boundary:
   • What enters the component? (request payload, function arguments, event data)
   • What exits the component? (response, return value, side effects)
   • Where does the data transform from correct to incorrect?
5. Capture the environment: OS, runtime version, browser (if web), configuration flags, feature flags, environment (dev/staging/prod)

Phase 2: Pattern Analysis

1. Find a working example of the same operation in the codebase or recent git history
2. Compare against the broken path — identify ALL differences, not just the first one
3. Check if the bug is isolated or systemic — does the same pattern break elsewhere?
4. Check if the bug is a regression — use git log, git bisect, or test history to find when it last worked

Phase 3: Root Cause Tracing

1. Trace the execution path from trigger to symptom. Map every function call, data transformation, and boundary crossing
2. Identify the exact point of failure — the line where behaviour diverges from expectation
3. Distinguish between:
   • Root cause — the underlying defect (e.g., missing null check)
   • Proximate cause — the immediate trigger (e.g., a null value arrived)
   • Contributing factors — conditions that made it possible (e.g., no input validation upstream)
4. If root cause cannot be determined, state what is known and what is unknown. Never guess

Phase 4: Coverage Gap Analysis

1. Should a test have caught this? Search for existing tests covering the affected code path
2. If tests exist but missed it — why? Wrong assertion? Missing edge case? Test not running?
3. If no tests exist — note the coverage gap as an action item
4. Check if the bug would be caught by:
   • Type checking (would stricter types prevent this?)
   • Linting rules (is there a rule that would flag this pattern?)
   • Runtime validation (would input validation at the boundary catch this?)

Severity Assessment

Assign severity based on impact, not frequency:

Severity	Criteria	Examples
Critical	Data loss, security breach, complete service outage, financial impact	Passwords logged in plaintext, database corruption, payment charged twice
High	Major feature broken for all users, no workaround	Login fails, search returns no results, file upload silently drops data
Medium	Feature degraded, workaround exists, or affects subset of users	Slow performance under load, incorrect sort order, formatting broken on mobile
Low	Cosmetic, minor UX issue, or edge case with trivial impact	Typo in UI, misaligned icon, tooltip shows raw key instead of translated text

Severity Modifiers

• Upgrade one level if: affects data integrity, is a security issue, or has no workaround
• Downgrade one level if: only affects internal tools, has easy workaround, or is behind a feature flag
• Never downgrade Critical — Critical is Critical

Reproduction Protocol

Reproduction steps must pass the "stranger test" — someone unfamiliar with the codebase must be able to follow them without asking questions.

Rules for reproduction steps:

1. Each step is ONE action (click, type, run command)
2. Include exact inputs — "enter 'test@example.com'" not "enter an email"
3. Include preconditions — "logged in as admin" not just "on the settings page"
4. Specify the starting state — "with a fresh database" or "after creating 3 items"
5. Include the observation point — "observe that..." at each step where behaviour matters
6. If timing matters, note it — "wait for the spinner to disappear before clicking"
7. If intermittent, document: frequency (1 in 5, sometimes, always), conditions that seem to increase likelihood, any timing dependencies

Reproduction Evidence

# Always include exact commands for code-level bugs
$ [exact command]
[exact output, verbatim]
$ echo $?
[exit code]

Bug Report Template

## [BUG] <concise title describing the defect>

### Severity
[Critical / High / Medium / Low] — [one-line justification]

### Environment
- **OS:** [e.g., macOS 15.3, Ubuntu 24.04]
- **Runtime:** [e.g., Node 22.1, .NET 9, Python 3.13]
- **Browser:** [if applicable — name and version]
- **Commit:** [git SHA]
- **Configuration:** [any relevant flags, env vars, feature flags]

### Summary
[1-2 sentences describing the defect. What is broken and who is affected.]

### Steps to Reproduce
1. [Precondition / starting state]
2. [Action 1 — exact input]
3. [Action 2 — exact input]
4. [Observation point — what you see]

### Expected Behaviour
[What should happen, with reference to spec/requirement if available]

### Actual Behaviour
[What actually happens — include exact error messages, stack traces, screenshots]

[Exact error output, verbatim — never paraphrased]

### Root Cause Analysis
- **Root cause:** [the underlying defect, or "under investigation"]
- **Proximate cause:** [the immediate trigger]
- **Affected code:** `[file:line]` — [brief description of the defect]
- **Introduced in:** [commit SHA or "unknown"] — [date if known]

### Regression?
- [ ] Yes — last worked in [commit/version]. Broken by [commit/PR if known]
- [ ] No — this has never worked correctly
- [ ] Unknown — no prior test coverage

### Coverage Gap
- **Existing tests:** [do tests exist for this path? did they pass?]
- **Gap:** [what test is missing that would have caught this?]
- **Recommended test:** [brief description of the test to add]

### Workaround
[If known — exact steps to work around the issue. "None known" if none]

### Suggested Fix
[If root cause is known — specific code change. Otherwise omit this section]

### Evidence
| Artifact | Value |
|---|---|
| Error message | [verbatim] |
| Command run | [exact command] |
| Exit code | [0/1] |
| Stack trace | [key frames] |
| Git bisect result | [good..bad range, if performed] |

Anti-Patterns (NEVER do these)

• Paraphrasing error messages — copy verbatim, always. "It threw an error" is not a bug report
• Vague reproduction steps — "click around in settings" tells the developer nothing
• Assuming the cause — "the database is broken" when you haven't traced the actual failure
• Bundling multiple bugs — one defect per report. If you find two bugs, write two reports
• Omitting environment — "it doesn't work" without specifying where, when, or how
• Severity inflation — calling everything Critical undermines triage. Use the criteria above
• Proposing fixes without evidence — the suggested fix must follow from the root cause analysis, not from intuition

Output

Deliver the complete bug report using the template above. Every field must be filled or explicitly marked as "under investigation". Empty sections are not acceptable.

Related Skills

• /qa-engineer:generate-tests — when tests reveal defects, write a bug report. When a bug is fixed, add a regression test.