Skills affaan-m ecc

click-path-audit

Use it when:
Users report a button that does nothing though debugging found no bug, or after changing a shared state store.
It does:
Maps what every store action sets and resets, then traces each handler's calls in order against what its label promises.
You get:
Numbered findings with a severity, the bug pattern, a call-by-call trace, expected and actual state, and a fix.
Looks for:
Sequential undo, async races, stale closures, missing state transitions, dead conditional paths and useEffect interference.
Unlike general debugging:
This one leaves API, styling and performance bugs aside and checks only the state flow behind each touchpoint.

TL;DR

Some bugs survive review because every function works on its own. The one behind this skill: a "New Email" button turned compose mode on, then cleared the selected thread, and clearing the thread reset compose mode, so the button did nothing. The audit starts by mapping each Zustand store or React context action: which fields it sets and which it resets as a side effect, flagging actions that clear state they don't own. Then, for every button, toggle and form submit in scope, it lists the handler's calls in order with what each reads and writes, and checks whether a later call undoes an earlier one, whether the final state matches the button's label, and whether async calls can resolve in the wrong order. You scope it to one page, to the consumers of a changed store, or to the whole app, which it splits across parallel agents once one agent has mapped the stores. It suggests running it after a systematic debugging pass and turning each finding into a test.

Summarizes the skill at d2ef268.

npx skills add https://github.com/affaan-m/ecc --skill click-path-audit
Total Downloads
5,400 on skills.sh, Nov 9, 2026
Repo stars
299,776 affaan-m/ecc
First seen
May 19, 2026 on skills.sh
Weekly Downloads
448
+74% over the 8 weeks to Nov 9
Weekly values
Week toInstalls
Sep 21257
Sep 28163
Oct 5141
Oct 12235
Oct 19417
Oct 26407
Nov 2477
Nov 9448
Category

Find root causes, review code and test what you built.

Everything for building software: planning, coding, debugging, design, frameworks, cloud, agents and skills.

Type

A multi-step process the agent follows: interview, debug, run a TDD loop, review.

Effect

Adds no side effects of its own. It shapes how the agent thinks, writes or reviews. Guidelines and routers are always effect:none, even when the task they support edits code.

Needs

Instructions only. Works in any agent that supports skills.

Publisher

Everyone else. Unverified vendor claims default to community.

Topics
Stack

SKILL.md

From affaan-m/ecc at d2ef268. Checked daily, last changed Nov 6, 2026.

Frontmatter
name: click-path-audit
description: "Trace every user-facing button/touchpoint through its full state change sequence to find bugs where functions individually work but cancel each other out, produce wrong final state, or leave the UI in an inconsistent state. Use when: systematic debugging found no bugs but users report broken buttons, or after any major refactor touching shared state stores."
metadata:
  origin: community

/click-path-audit — Behavioural Flow Audit

Find bugs that static code reading misses: state interaction side effects, race conditions between sequential calls, and handlers that silently undo each other.

The Problem This Solves

Traditional debugging checks:

  • Does the function exist? (missing wiring)
  • Does it crash? (runtime errors)
  • Does it return the right type? (data flow)

But it does NOT check:

  • Does the final UI state match what the button label promises?
  • Does function B silently undo what function A just did?
  • Does shared state (Zustand/Redux/context) have side effects that cancel the intended action?

Real example: A "New Email" button called setComposeMode(true) then selectThread(null). Both worked individually. But selectThread had a side effect resetting composeMode: false. The button did nothing. 54 bugs were found by systematic debugging — this one was missed.


How It Works

For EVERY interactive touchpoint in the target area:

1. IDENTIFY the handler (onClick, onSubmit, onChange, etc.)
2. TRACE every function call in the handler, IN ORDER
3. For EACH function call:
   a. What state does it READ?
   b. What state does it WRITE?
   c. Does it have SIDE EFFECTS on shared state?
   d. Does it reset/clear any state as a side effect?
4. CHECK: Does any later call UNDO a state change from an earlier call?
5. CHECK: Is the FINAL state what the user expects from the button label?
6. CHECK: Are there race conditions (async calls that resolve in wrong order)?

Execution Steps

Step 1: Map State Stores

Before auditing any touchpoint, build a side-effect map of every state store action:

For each Zustand store / React context in scope:
  For each action/setter:
    - What fields does it set?
    - Does it RESET other fields as a side effect?
    - Document: actionName → {sets: [...], resets: [...]}

This is the critical reference. The "New Email" bug was invisible without knowing that selectThread resets composeMode.

Output format:

STORE: emailStore
  setComposeMode(bool) → sets: {composeMode}
  selectThread(thread|null) → sets: {selectedThread, selectedThreadId, messages, drafts, selectedDraft, summary} RESETS: {composeMode: false, composeData: null, redraftOpen: false}
  setDraftGenerating(bool) → sets: {draftGenerating}
  ...

DANGEROUS RESETS (actions that clear state they don't own):
  selectThread → resets composeMode (owned by setComposeMode)
  reset → resets everything
Step 2: Audit Each Touchpoint

For each button/toggle/form submit in the target area:

TOUCHPOINT: [Button label] in [Component:line]
  HANDLER: onClick → {
    call 1: functionA() → sets {X: true}
    call 2: functionB() → sets {Y: null} RESETS {X: false}  ← CONFLICT
  }
  EXPECTED: User sees [description of what button label promises]
  ACTUAL: X is false because functionB reset it
  VERDICT: BUG — [description]

Check each of these bug patterns:

Pattern 1: Sequential Undo
handler() {
  setState_A(true)     // sets X = true
  setState_B(null)     // side effect: resets X = false
}
// Result: X is false. First call was pointless.
Pattern 2: Async Race
handler() {
  fetchA().then(() => setState({ loading: false }))
  fetchB().then(() => setState({ loading: true }))
}
// Result: final loading state depends on which resolves first
Pattern 3: Stale Closure
const [count, setCount] = useState(0)
const handler = useCallback(() => {
  setCount(count + 1)  // captures stale count
  setCount(count + 1)  // same stale count — increments by 1, not 2
}, [count])
Pattern 4: Missing State Transition
// Button says "Save" but handler only validates, never actually saves
// Button says "Delete" but handler sets a flag without calling the API
// Button says "Send" but the API endpoint is removed/broken
Pattern 5: Conditional Dead Path
handler() {
  if (someState) {        // someState is ALWAYS false at this point
    doTheActualThing()    // never reached
  }
}
Pattern 6: useEffect Interference
// Button sets stateX = true
// A useEffect watches stateX and resets it to false
// User sees nothing happen
Step 3: Report

For each bug found:

CLICK-PATH-NNN: [severity: CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
  Touchpoint: [Button label] in [file:line]
  Pattern: [Sequential Undo / Async Race / Stale Closure / Missing Transition / Dead Path / useEffect Interference]
  Handler: [function name or inline]
  Trace:
    1. [call] → sets {field: value}
    2. [call] → RESETS {field: value}  ← CONFLICT
  Expected: [what user expects]
  Actual: [what actually happens]
  Fix: [specific fix]

Scope Control

This audit is expensive. Scope it appropriately:

  • Full app audit: Use when launching or after major refactor. Launch parallel agents per page.
  • Single page audit: Use after building a new page or after a user reports a broken button.
  • Store-focused audit: Use after modifying a Zustand store — audit all consumers of the changed actions.
Recommended agent split for full app:
Agent 1: Map ALL state stores (Step 1) — this is shared context for all other agents
Agent 2: Dashboard (Tasks, Notes, Journal, Ideas)
Agent 3: Chat (DanteChatColumn, JustChatPage)
Agent 4: Emails (ThreadList, DraftArea, EmailsPage)
Agent 5: Projects (ProjectsPage, ProjectOverviewTab, NewProjectWizard)
Agent 6: CRM (all sub-tabs)
Agent 7: Profile, Settings, Vault, Notifications
Agent 8: Management Suite (all pages)

Agent 1 MUST complete first. Its output is input for all other agents.


When to Use

  • After systematic debugging finds "no bugs" but users report broken UI
  • After modifying any Zustand store action (check all callers)
  • After any refactor that touches shared state
  • Before release, on critical user flows
  • When a button "does nothing" — this is THE tool for that

When NOT to Use

  • For API-level bugs (wrong response shape, missing endpoint) — use systematic-debugging
  • For styling/layout issues — visual inspection
  • For performance issues — profiling tools

Integration with Other Skills

  • Run AFTER /superpowers:systematic-debugging (which finds the other 54 bug types)
  • Run BEFORE /superpowers:verification-before-completion (which verifies fixes work)
  • Feeds into /superpowers:test-driven-development — every bug found here should get a test

Example: The Bug That Inspired This Skill

ThreadList.tsx "New Email" button:

onClick={() => {
  useEmailStore.getState().setComposeMode(true)   // ✓ sets composeMode = true
  useEmailStore.getState().selectThread(null)      // ✗ RESETS composeMode = false
}}

Store definition:

selectThread: (thread) => set({
  selectedThread: thread,
  selectedThreadId: thread?.id ?? null,
  messages: [],
  drafts: [],
  selectedDraft: null,
  summary: null,
  composeMode: false,     // ← THIS silent reset killed the button
  composeData: null,
  redraftOpen: false,
})

Systematic debugging missed it because:

  • The button has an onClick handler (not dead)
  • Both functions exist (no missing wiring)
  • Neither function crashes (no runtime error)
  • The data types are correct (no type mismatch)

Click-path audit catches it because:

  • Step 1 maps selectThread resets composeMode
  • Step 2 traces the handler: call 1 sets true, call 2 resets false
  • Verdict: Sequential Undo — final state contradicts button intent