Bugfix Workflow

Follow this workflow for GitHub issue bugfixes. Do not skip reproduction; fixing without first reproducing the bug tends to produce incomplete fixes and regressions.

Input

A GitHub issue URL or number. Slash-command arguments are appended to this skill body by Qwen Code.

Artifact Path

Use .qwen/issues/ in this repo. In the steps below, <issue-file> means the selected issue markdown file.

Step 1: Read The Issue

Create the artifact directory if needed, then pipe the issue directly into a markdown file using gh:

mkdir -p .qwen/issues
gh issue view <number> \
  --json number,title,body \
  -t '# Issue #{{.number}}: {{.title}}

{{.body}}

---

## Reproduction report

_Pending - to be filled by the test engineer._

## Verification report

_Pending - to be filled by the test engineer._
' > .qwen/issues/issue-<number>.md

Step 2: Reproduce

Spawn the test-engineer agent and point it at <issue-file>. State only the goal: reproduce the bug. Keep the prompt minimal; the test engineer owns the reproduction strategy.

Wait for the test engineer to finish. Then read <issue-file> to get the reproduction report. If the status is NOT_REPRODUCED, report that and stop.

Step 3: Fix

Read the relevant code and make the fix. Use the reproduction report for context; it should contain observed behavior, expected behavior, and useful code paths.

If the bug is complex enough that the first attempt does not work, use the structured-debugging skill and work through hypotheses systematically.

Step 4: Verify

Build and bundle your changes:

npm run build && npm run bundle

Spawn the test-engineer agent again, pointing it at the same issue file. State the goal: verify the fix using node dist/cli.js.

If the verification status is STILL_BROKEN, read the updated issue file, go back to Step 3, and iterate. Do not proceed until verification returns VERIFIED_FIXED.

Step 5: Tests

Run unit tests for any packages you modified. If the test engineer wrote a failing test during reproduction, make sure it passes after the fix. Otherwise, add focused regression coverage for the failure scenario.

Step 6: Code Review

Skip this only for a plain one-line or trivial config fix. For anything else, run /review with a review task listing all changed files. Triage each comment with a verdict:

• Valid: real bug or meaningful improvement. Fix it.
• False positive: reviewer missed context. Skip it.
• Overthinking: technically plausible but not worth the complexity. Skip it.

After fixing valid issues, re-run unit tests and a quick verification sanity check.

Iteration Rules

• If Step 4 fails, go back to Step 3, then re-run Step 4.
• If Step 6 finds valid issues, fix them, then re-run Step 4 as a sanity check.
• Do not loop more than 3 times between Steps 3-6 without asking the user.