fix-issue

Fix Issue

Systematic issue resolution with hypothesis-based root cause analysis, similar issue detection, and prevention recommendations.

Quick Start

/ork:fix-issue 123
/ork:fix-issue 456

Opus 4.6: Root cause analysis uses native adaptive thinking. Dynamic token budgets scale with context window for thorough investigation.

Argument Resolution

ISSUE_NUMBER = "$ARGUMENTS[0]"  # e.g., "123" (CC 2.1.59 indexed access)
# $ARGUMENTS contains the full argument string
# $ARGUMENTS[0] is the first space-separated token

STEP -1: MCP Probe + Resume Check

Run BEFORE any other step. Detect available MCP servers and check for resumable state.

# Probe MCPs (parallel — all in ONE message):
ToolSearch(query="select:mcp__memory__search_nodes")
ToolSearch(query="select:mcp__context7__resolve-library-id")

# Write capability map:
Write(".claude/chain/capabilities.json", JSON.stringify({
  "memory": <true if found>,
  "context7": <true if found>,
  "timestamp": now()
}))

# Check for resumable state:
Read(".claude/chain/state.json")
# If exists and skill == "fix-issue":
#   Read last handoff, skip to current_phase
#   Tell user: "Resuming from Phase {N}"
# If not exists: write initial state
Write(".claude/chain/state.json", JSON.stringify({
  "skill": "fix-issue",
  "issue": ISSUE_NUMBER,
  "current_phase": 1,
  "completed_phases": [],
  "capabilities": capabilities
}))

Load pattern details: Read("${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/chain-patterns/references/mcp-detection.md")

STEP 0: Effort-Aware Fix Scaling (CC 2.1.76)

Scale investigation depth based on /effort level:

Effort Level	Approach	Agents	Phases
low	Quick fix: read → fix → test → done	0 agents	1, 6, 7, 11
medium	Standard: investigate → fix → test → prevent	2-3 agents	1-4, 6-8, 11
high (default)	Full RCA: 5 parallel agents → fix → prevent → lessons	5 agents	All 11 phases

Override: Explicit user selection (e.g., "Proper fix") overrides /effort downscaling. Hotfix always uses minimal phases regardless of effort.

STEP 0a: Verify User Intent

BEFORE creating tasks, clarify fix approach:

AskUserQuestion(
  questions=[{
    "question": "How do you want to approach this fix?",
    "header": "Fix Approach",
    "options": [
      {"label": "Proper fix (Recommended)", "description": "Full RCA, regression test, prevention plan", "markdown": "```\nProper Fix (11 phases)\n──────────────────────\n  Understand ──▶ Hypothesize ──▶ RCA\n       │              │           │\n       ▼              ▼           ▼\n  5 parallel     Ranked       Confirmed\n  agents         hypotheses   root cause\n       │\n       ▼\n  Fix ──▶ Validate ──▶ Prevent ──▶ PR\n  + regression test   + runbook\n```"},
      {"label": "Quick fix", "description": "Minimal investigation, fix and test", "markdown": "```\nQuick Fix (~10 min)\n───────────────────\n  Read issue ──▶ Fix ──▶ Test ──▶ PR\n\n  Skip: full RCA, prevention plan,\n  runbook, lessons learned\n  Keep: regression test (mandatory)\n```"},
      {"label": "Investigate first", "description": "Deep analysis before deciding on approach", "markdown": "```\nInvestigate First\n─────────────────\n  Read issue ──▶ 5 parallel agents ──▶ Report\n\n  Output: Root cause analysis\n  + hypothesis ranking\n  + recommended approach\n  No code changes yet\n```"},
      {"label": "Hotfix", "description": "Emergency fix, minimal process", "markdown": "```\nHotfix (emergency)\n──────────────────\n  Read issue ──▶ Fix ──▶ Push\n\n  Skip: agents, RCA, prevention\n  Keep: basic test verification\n  Post-fix: schedule proper RCA\n```"}
    ],
    "multiSelect": false
  }]
)

Based on answer, adjust workflow:

• Proper fix: All 11 phases, 5 parallel RCA agents
• Quick fix: Phases 1, 6, 7, 11 only — skip RCA agents and prevention
• Investigate first: Enter plan mode for read-only analysis, then decide
• Hotfix: Phases 1, 6, 11 only — emergency path

If 'Investigate first' selected:

# 1. Enter read-only plan mode
EnterPlanMode("Investigate issue: $ISSUE_REF")

# 2. Investigation phase — Read/Grep/Glob ONLY, no Write/Edit
#    - Read the issue description and linked context
#    - Trace the error path through relevant code
#    - Search for related issues, past fixes, test failures
#    - Build hypothesis list with evidence

# 3. Produce RCA report:
#    - Root cause hypothesis (ranked by confidence)
#    - Affected files and blast radius
#    - Recommended approach (proper fix vs quick fix)
#    - Risk assessment

# 4. Exit plan mode — returns analysis for user decision
ExitPlanMode()

# 5. User reviews RCA. If "proceed with fix" → continue to Phase 5 (Fix).
#    If "need more info" → re-enter investigation.

Load Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/rules/evidence-gathering.md") for detailed workflow adjustments per approach.

STEP 0b: Select Orchestration Mode

Choose Agent Teams (mesh) or Task tool (star). Load Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/agent-selection.md") for the selection criteria, cost comparison, and task creation patterns.

Service Discovery & Visual Inspection

When the issue involves a running web app, API, or UI bug, discover services and inspect visually before forming hypotheses:

# 1. Discover services via Portless (preferred)
portless list 2>/dev/null
# api → api.localhost:1355   (port 8080)
# app → app.localhost:1355   (port 3000)

# 2. Fallback: discover ports manually
lsof -iTCP -sTCP:LISTEN -nP | grep -E 'node|python|java'

# 3. Visual inspection with agent-browser
agent-browser open "http://app.localhost:1355"
agent-browser screenshot /tmp/issue-before.png     # capture broken state
agent-browser console                              # check for JS errors
agent-browser network log                          # inspect failed API calls
agent-browser get text @error-banner               # extract error messages

Use Portless named URLs (*.localhost:1355) in all investigation steps — they're stable, self-documenting, and eliminate port-guessing failures. Install with npm i -g portless.

Workflow Overview

Phase	Activities	Output
1. Understand Issue	Read GitHub issue details	Problem statement
1b. Service Discovery	Portless list, agent-browser visual inspection	Service URLs, screenshots
2. Similar Issue Detection	Search for related past issues	Related issues list
3. Hypothesis Formation	Form hypotheses with confidence scores	Ranked hypotheses
4. Root Cause Analysis	5 parallel agents investigate	Confirmed root cause
5. Fix Design	Design approach based on RCA	Fix specification
6. Implementation	Apply fix with tests	Working code
7. Validation	Verify fix resolves issue, screenshot after state	Evidence
8. Prevention	How to prevent recurrence	Prevention plan
9. Runbook	Create/update runbook entry	Runbook
10. Lessons Learned	Capture knowledge	Persisted learnings
11. Commit and PR	Create PR with fix	Merged PR

Progressive Output (CC 2.1.76)

Output results incrementally as each phase completes — don't batch until the PR:

After Phase	Show User
1. Understand Issue	Problem statement, affected files
3. Hypothesis Formation	Ranked hypotheses with confidence scores
4. RCA	Confirmed root cause, evidence chain
6. Implementation	Fix description, files changed
7. Validation	Test results, before/after behavior

For the proper fix path with 5 parallel RCA agents, output each agent's findings as they return — don't wait for all 5. If one agent identifies the root cause with high confidence early, flag it immediately so the user can confirm and skip remaining agents.

Phase Handoffs (CC 2.1.71)

Write handoff JSON after phases 3, 4, 6, 7 to .claude/chain/. See chain-patterns skill for schema.

After Phase	Handoff File	Key Outputs
3. Hypothesis	03-hypotheses.json	Ranked hypotheses with confidence scores
4. RCA	04-rca.json	Confirmed root cause, evidence, affected files
6. Implementation	06-fix.json	Fix description, files changed, test plan
7. Validation	07-validation.json	Test results, coverage delta

Worktree-Isolated RCA Agents (CC 2.1.50)

Phase 4 agents SHOULD use isolation: "worktree" when they need to edit files:

Agent(subagent_type="debug-investigator",
  prompt="Investigate hypothesis: {desc}...",
  isolation="worktree", run_in_background=true)

Post-Fix Monitoring (CC 2.1.71)

After Phase 11 (commit + PR), schedule CI monitoring:

# Guard: Skip cron in headless/CI (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_CRON)
# if env CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_CRON is set, run a single check instead
CronCreate(
  schedule="*/5 * * * *",
  prompt="Check CI for PR #{pr_number}: gh pr checks {pr_number} --repo {repo}.
    All pass → CronDelete this job. Any fail → alert with details."
)

Worktree Cleanup (CC 2.1.72)

If worktree isolation was used in Phase 4, clean up after validation:

# After Phase 7 validation passes — exit worktree, keep branch for PR
ExitWorktree(action="keep")

Every EnterWorktree or isolation: "worktree" agent must have a matching cleanup. If agents used isolation: "worktree", they handle their own exit — but if the lead entered a worktree in Step 0, it must call ExitWorktree before Phase 11 commit.

Fix Pattern Memory

If memory MCP is available (from Step -1 probe), save the fix pattern:

if capabilities.memory:
  mcp__memory__create_entities([{
    name: "fix-pattern-{slug}",
    entityType: "fix-pattern",
    observations: [root_cause, fix_description, regression_test, issue_ref]
  }])

Full phase details: Load Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/fix-phases.md") for bash commands, templates, and procedures for each phase.

Critical Constraints

• Feature branch MANDATORY -- NEVER commit directly to main or dev
• Regression test MANDATORY -- write failing test BEFORE implementing fix
• Prevention required -- at least one of: automated test, validation rule, or process check
• Make minimal, focused changes; DO NOT over-engineer

CC 2.1.49 Enhancements

Load Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/cc-enhancements.md") for session resume, task metrics, tool guidance, worktree isolation, and adaptive thinking.

Rules Quick Reference

Rule	Impact	What It Covers
evidence-gathering (load ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/rules/evidence-gathering.md)	HIGH	User intent verification, confidence scale, key decisions
rca-five-whys (load ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/rules/rca-five-whys.md)	HIGH	5 Whys iterative causal analysis
rca-fishbone (load ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/rules/rca-fishbone.md)	MEDIUM	Ishikawa diagram, multi-factor analysis
rca-fault-tree (load ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/rules/rca-fault-tree.md)	MEDIUM	Fault tree analysis, AND/OR gates, critical systems

Related Skills

• ork:commit - Commit issue fixes
• debug-investigator - Debug complex issues
• browser-tools - Visual inspection with agent-browser + Portless
• ork:issue-progress-tracking - Auto-updates from commits
• ork:remember - Store lessons learned

References

Load on demand with Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/<file>"):

File	Content
fix-phases.md	Bash commands, templates, procedures per phase
agent-selection.md	Orchestration mode selection criteria and cost comparison
similar-issue-search.md	Similar issue detection patterns
hypothesis-rca.md	Hypothesis-based root cause analysis
agent-teams-rca.md	Agent Teams RCA workflow
prevention-patterns.md	Recurrence prevention patterns
cc-enhancements.md	CC 2.1.49 session resume, task metrics, adaptive thinking

---

Version: 2.4.0 (March 2026) — Rich elicitation with options for fix approach, progressive output for incremental phase results