Projects
Bug Hunter Replay
Portfolio project record for replaying bug reports, logs, and verification evidence through a structured debugging loop.
Summary
- Focuses on reproducibility, command evidence, and regression verification.
- Public case-study evidence is still pending.
Problem
- Bug fixes are hard to trust when reproduction steps, command output, and regression checks are scattered.
- No public case study is verified yet, so the detail page must separate workflow intent from proof.
Approach
- Track debugging replay as a workflow centered on reproduction, logs, minimal fixes, and verification evidence.
- Use workflow notes until a public case study or replay artifact is available.
Evidence artifacts
Workflow noteworkflow
Tracked as a debugging replay workflow with evidence-first closeout rules.
No verified URL attached
Case study TBDcase-study
No public case study link has been verified.
No verified URL attached
Proof boundary
Missing public proof stays visible here as TBD, pending, planned, prototype, research, or note-style evidence. SkillDex does not turn unverified artifacts into proof links.
Related skills
Related skills are navigation and workflow-capability links. They do not replace evidence artifacts and should not be read as proof that a project is shipped.
- activeDevOps / DeploymentOther skillGH Fix CI
A Codex Skill for investigating failing GitHub Actions checks, reading logs with gh, and preparing a bounded fix plan.
- activeTesting / QAOther skillPlaywright
A Codex Skill for automating a real browser from the terminal for navigation, form work, screenshots, snapshots, extraction, and UI-flow debugging.
- activeProject ManagementMy skillVibe Coding Review
A personal project-governance Skill for keeping AI-assisted coding work aligned with project briefs, active phases, review gates, and explicit non-goals.
Next steps
- Publish one sanitized bug replay case study with commands, observed failure, fix, and regression test.
- Keep private logs or user data out of any public evidence artifact.