Team Debug

Debug complex issues using the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) methodology. Multiple debugger agents investigate different hypotheses in parallel, gathering evidence to confirm or falsify each one.

Pre-flight Checks

1. Verify CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1 is set
2. Parse $ARGUMENTS:
   • <error-description-or-file>: description of the bug, error message, or path to a file exhibiting the issue
   • --hypotheses N: number of hypotheses to generate (default: 3)
   • --scope: investigation scope — files (specific files), module (module/package), project (entire project)

Phase 1: Initial Triage

1. Analyze the error description or file:
   • If file path: read the file, look for obvious issues, collect error context
   • If error description: search the codebase for related code, error messages, stack traces
2. Identify the symptom clearly: what is failing, when, and how
3. Gather initial context: recent git changes, related tests, configuration

Phase 2: Hypothesis Generation

Generate N hypotheses about the root cause, covering different failure mode categories:

1. Logic Error — Incorrect algorithm, wrong condition, off-by-one, missing edge case
2. Data Issue — Invalid input, type mismatch, null/undefined, encoding problem
3. State Problem — Race condition, stale cache, incorrect initialization, mutation bug
4. Integration Failure — API contract violation, version mismatch, configuration error
5. Resource Issue — Memory leak, connection exhaustion, timeout, disk space
6. Environment — Missing dependency, wrong version, platform-specific behavior

Present hypotheses to user: "Generated {N} hypotheses. Spawning investigators..."

Phase 3: Investigation

1. Use TeamCreate tool to create the team with team_name: "debug-{timestamp}" and description
2. For each hypothesis, use Agent tool to spawn a teammate:
   • name: investigator-{n} (e.g., "investigator-1")
   • subagent_type: "agent-teams:team-debugger"
   • prompt: Include the hypothesis, investigation scope, and relevant context
3. Use TaskCreate for each investigator's task:
   • Subject: "Investigate hypothesis: {hypothesis summary}"
   • Description: Full hypothesis statement, scope boundaries, evidence criteria

Phase 4: Evidence Collection

1. Monitor TaskList for completion
2. As investigators complete, collect their evidence reports
3. Track: "{completed}/{total} investigations complete"

Phase 5: Arbitration

1. Compare findings across all investigators:

   • Which hypotheses were confirmed (high confidence)?
   • Which were falsified (contradicting evidence)?
   • Which are inconclusive (insufficient evidence)?

2. Rank confirmed hypotheses by:

   • Confidence level (High > Medium > Low)
   • Strength of causal chain
   • Amount of supporting evidence
   • Absence of contradicting evidence

3. Present root cause analysis:

   ## Debug Report: {error description}
   
   ### Root Cause (Most Likely)
   **Hypothesis**: {description}
   **Confidence**: {High/Medium/Low}
   **Evidence**: {summary with file:line citations}
   **Causal Chain**: {step-by-step from cause to symptom}
   
   ### Recommended Fix
   {specific fix with code changes}
   
   ### Other Hypotheses
   - {hypothesis 2}: {status} — {brief evidence summary}
   - {hypothesis 3}: {status} — {brief evidence summary}
   

Phase 6: Cleanup

1. Send shutdown_request to all investigators
2. Call TeamDelete to remove team resources