Menu

Individual skill

exorcist

0upvotes

Diagnose an uncertain bug by designing experiments that distinguish competing causes, especially speculative cache, timing, environment, or concurrency explanations.

skills/exorcist/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 62ac90e9a6bb3f45a72342198ad533eb4870e944

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
No
Observed behavior
Not checked yet
Last checked
Nov 6, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
14
Repository last updated
Oct 7, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# Exorcist

> You keep saying cache. Let's test that belief.

## Find the decision-changing observation

Start at the reported failure using supplied paths or the repository file list. Reuse existing reproduction evidence; trace only until plausible causes diverge. Don't manufacture hypotheses for an established mechanism.

Observe that boundary in the actual implementation: submission versus persistence, dispatch versus completion, configuration versus effective state. Prefer existing observations or a recording dependency. Another layer recording the same value adds nothing unless its provenance is unresolved. A rewritten simulation or repeated success flag cannot establish an unobserved effect.

Choose the runner before inspecting setup: use existing tests when they exercise the distinction, otherwise one small probe with comparable inputs and controlled timing. Inspect fixtures/configuration if that path uses them or they could explain the symptom. Retain normal controls; repeat only for unresolved intermittency or a required check.

Before another experiment, ask which possible result changes the diagnosis or next action. If none, stop. A symptom without a suspected dependency shows that dependency is unnecessary for this reproduction, not every production incident. Explain why the existing safeguard does or doesn't address the observed mechanism.
Back to top