Bug Fixing Openclaw

Bug Fix v4.0 — OpenClaw Edition (Zero-Regression + Portable)

Core Promise: Fix completely. Fix everywhere. Break nothing. Learn from every fix.

Iron Rules (12 — NEVER Violate)

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  Rule 1:  Root cause MUST pass 4 gates before fixing                     │
│           (reproducible + causal + reversible + mechanistic)              │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 2:  Scope MUST pass 5 gates before fixing                          │
│           (consumers + contracts + invariants + call sites + dup scan)    │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 3:  MUST trace IMPACT CHAIN (code → data → time → event)          │
│           + scan ALL files for same pattern before writing fix            │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 4:  MUST predict side effects + check blind spots before coding    │
│           (references/blind-spots.md is single source of truth)           │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 5:  After fix, MUST run regression verification                    │
│           (functional + performance + concurrency + all impact levels)    │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 6:  MUST verify fix is LOADED at runtime                           │
│           (clear __pycache__ + restart + exercise code path)              │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 7:  Framework behavior → read source code first, never trust       │
│           docs/comments/assumptions alone                                │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 8:  UI bugs MUST gather RUNTIME EVIDENCE before proposing fixes    │
│           (screenshot + DevTools DOM/console + user repro steps)          │
│           Do NOT fix UI bugs based on code reading alone.                │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 9:  Fix is NOT done until: Bug Summary output + code-review        │
│           passes + knowledge files updated + self-reflection complete     │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 10: Before fixing, CLASSIFY the problem layer:                     │
│           code bug? missing config? wrong architecture? AI capability?   │
│           Fix at the root layer, not at the symptom layer.               │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 11: Pattern matching (regex, string match, name lookup) MUST       │
│           check boundary conditions (word boundaries / anchors / exact)   │
│                                                                          │
│  Rule 12: Before fix, MUST search bug pattern library + bug records      │
│           for known fixes and historical context                         │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Workflow Overview

Phase 0: Triage → Severity (P0-P3) + Tier (Trivial/Standard/Complex)
  │
  ├─ Trivial → Quick Fix → test → done
  │
  ├─ Standard ─┐
  └─ Complex ──┘
      │
Phase 1: Reproduce (evidence required)
      │
Phase 2: Root Cause Analysis
    2A: Hypothesis ladder → 5 Whys → evidence
    2B: Search knowledge files (bug-patterns + bug-records)
    2C: Impact chain (code + data + time + event)
    2D: Similar issue scan across codebase
      │
Phase 3: Scope + Prediction
    3A: Consumer list → contracts → invariants → dup scan (5 gates)
    3B: Side effect prediction + blind spot check
    3C: Fix strategy comparison (when >10 LOC, Complex only)
      │
Phase 4: Fix (minimal change, prefer ≤50 LOC)
      │
Phase 5: Verify + Review
    5A: Regression verification (functional + perf + concurrency)
    5B: Runtime deployment verification
    5C: Bug Summary + code-review skill
      │
Phase 6: Knowledge Deposit + Self-Reflection

Phase 0: Triage + Severity

Classify severity AND tier FIRST to control workflow depth.

Severity Classification (controls workflow depth)

Tier Classification (controls fix path)

Quick Fix Path (Trivial only)

## Quick Fix
- Bug: [one-line description]
- Fix: [one-line change]
- File: [path:line]
- Test: [how verified — lint/test/manual]
- Risk: None (isolated, no behavioral change)

After quick fix: update references/bug-records.md, done. No RCA, no impact chain, no self-reflection needed.

If "trivial" fix touches >1 file or changes behavior → upgrade to Standard.

Auto-Initialize Knowledge Files

Check: references/bug-patterns.md exists?
  YES → search it in Phase 2B
  NO  → skip pattern search; create after first fix

Check: references/bug-records.md exists?
  YES → search it in Phase 2B
  NO  → skip records search; create after first fix

Check: references/blind-spots.md exists?
  YES → use it in Phase 3B
  NO  → skip blind spot check; create after first fix

Phase 1: Reproduce

MUST have evidence before continuing. No evidence = no fix.

UI Bug Protocol (Rule 8):

1. Get user screenshot or screen recording
2. Open browser DevTools → check Console for errors/warnings
3. Inspect DOM structure (check for overflow clipping, z-index, Portal needs)
4. Reproduce the exact user steps
5. ONLY THEN form hypotheses

Evidence Bundle Template

### Trigger Conditions
- Input/params: [...]
- Environment: [OS/browser/runtime version]
- Timing: [action sequence or time interval]

### Observable Output
- Error message: [full error text]
- Logs: [key log lines]
- Screenshot/recording: [if available]

### Correlation IDs
- requestId/traceId: [...]
- sessionId: [...]

Phase 2: Root Cause Analysis

2A: Hypothesis Ladder

Rules: Sort by likelihood → each must be falsifiable → run rejection tests first → test ONE at a time → use 5 Whys to reach root cause.

Root Cause Confirmation Gate (Rule 1)

Root cause is confirmed only when ALL 4 conditions are met:

Framework Assumption Audit (Rule 7)

When fix involves framework/library behavior: list assumptions → read source code to verify → document in comments with source references.

2B: Search Knowledge Files (Rule 12)

Search bug-patterns.md and bug-records.md for matching patterns. Skip if files don't exist (see Phase 0 auto-init).

2C: Impact Chain (Rule 3)

2D: Similar Issue Scan (Rule 3)

Scan ALL files for the same bug pattern, not just the reported file.

rg -n "function_name\|similar_pattern" --glob "*.{ts,tsx,py,js}"

Phase 3: Scope + Prediction

Scope Accuracy Gate (Rule 2)

3A: Side Effect Prediction (Rule 4)

1. Change Blueprint — What exactly will change
2. Impact Ripple — L0 (code) → L1 (module) → L2 (feature) → L3 (system) → L4 (user)
3. Blind Spot Check — Read references/blind-spots.md and execute every active check
4. Go/No-Go Decision

Quick version (for Standard-tier, ≤5 LOC, 1 file):

## Quick Impact Check
- Change: [one-line description]
- Direct callers: [list or "none - local function"]
- Duplicates: [checked — none / found and planned]
- Could break: [prediction or "low risk - isolated"]
- Decision: GO

3B: Fix Strategy Comparison (>10 LOC, Complex only)

Phase 4: Fix

• Minimal change, prefer ≤50 LOC; justify if more
• ONE change at a time, never batch unrelated fixes
• Layer Rule (Rule 10): Before writing fix code, verify you're fixing the right layer:

• Pattern matching safety (Rule 11): regex, string match, name lookup → always consider boundary conditions
• DB schema change? Generate Alembic migration:

  cd backend && alembic revision --autogenerate -m "describe change"
  

Phase 5: Verify + Review

5A: Regression Verification (Rule 5)

Test the entire impact chain (L0-L3), not just the original bug.

5B: Runtime Deployment Verification (Rule 6)

If NOT deployed → restart and re-verify before proceeding.

5C: Bug Summary + Code Review (Rule 9)

## Bug Summary [BUG-XXX]
- **Symptom**: [one-sentence user-visible problem]
- **Root Cause**: [one-sentence actual cause]
- **Fix**: [one-sentence fix description]
- **Files Modified**: [file1.py, file2.ts]
- **Severity**: P0/P1/P2

Output Bug Summary → run code-review skill → if review finds issues → fix → re-verify

Stop condition: Code review clean + regression passed + deployment verified + original bug fixed.

Special Checks

Phase 6: Knowledge Deposit + Self-Reflection

6.1 Update Knowledge Files (Rule 9)

6.2 Self-Reflection (Rule 9)

Regression Autopsy (when fix introduced a regression)

- **Original Bug**: [what was being fixed]
- **New Bug Introduced**: [what broke]
- **Why I didn't predict it**: [blind spot]
- **Classification**: [missed consumer / contract violation / edge case / ...]

Domain-Specific Checks

Skill Delegation

Anti-Patterns (FORBIDDEN)

Final Checklist

Core (Standard + Complex tiers)

Trivial Tier Checklist (Quick Fix path only)

OpenClaw Project Context

Architecture Map

backend/app/
├── api/v1/              # FastAPI routes (agents, auth, chat, skills, tools, profile)
├── core/
│   ├── graph/           # LangGraph StateGraph (agent_graph, nodes/llm_node, tool_node, prepare_node)
│   ├── langchain/       # LangChain tools (tools.py, shell_tool.py, e2b_tools.py)
│   ├── mcp/             # MCP server integration (pool.py)
│   ├── database.py      # SQLAlchemy async engine
│   └── security.py      # JWT auth
├── models/              # SQLAlchemy ORM models (agent, tool, user, skill)
├── schemas/             # Pydantic request/response schemas
├── services/            # Business logic (agent_executor, chat_service, tool_call_parser, ...)
├── middleware/           # Request logging, audit, error handling
└── main.py              # FastAPI app entry

frontend/src/
├── features/            # Feature modules (chat, settings, admin, knowledge, skills, agents)
│   ├── chat/            # ChatPageV2, MessageRenderer, ToolCallCard, SkillExecutionInline
│   └── ...
├── components/ui/       # shadcn/ui style components (dialog, switch, checkbox)
├── hooks/               # React hooks (useChatStream — SSE event handling)
├── store/               # Zustand state management
└── lib/                 # API client (api-client.ts), markdown utils

Tech Stack

High-Risk Bug Zones

Backend Hot Zones

Frontend Hot Zones

Two Code Paths for Agent Execution

Path A: Direct Executor (most common)
  chat API → chat_service → agent_executor.py → tool_call_parser.py → tool execution

Path B: StateGraph (LangGraph)
  chat API → chat_service → agent_graph.py → llm_node.py → tool_node.py → tool execution

When fixing anything in Path A, always check Path B for the same issue (and vice versa).

Known Duplicate Implementations

OpenClaw Common Framework Pitfalls (Rule 7)

Windows Development Environment Gotchas

Verification Commands (OpenClaw)

Backend

cd backend
ruff check app/                                    # Lint
python -m pytest tests/ -v --tb=short              # Unit tests
python -m pytest tests/test_specific.py -v         # Specific test
alembic revision --autogenerate -m "check"         # DB migration check

Frontend

cd frontend
npm run lint
npm run typecheck
npm test
npm run build

Backend Server Restart

Get-WmiObject Win32_Process -Filter "Name='python.exe'" | Where { $_.CommandLine -like "*run_dev*" }
Stop-Process -Id [PID] -Force
Get-ChildItem -Path "backend" -Recurse -Filter "__pycache__" -Directory | Remove-Item -Recurse -Force
Start-Process -FilePath "backend\venv\Scripts\python.exe" -ArgumentList "run_dev.py" -WorkingDirectory "backend"
Invoke-WebRequest -Uri "http://127.0.0.1:8000/docs" -UseBasicParsing -TimeoutSec 5

Reference Files

Living Data Files (update after every fix)

Pattern Libraries (domain knowledge)

Detailed Guides

Skill Evolution

Update this skill when:

• Code review finds a bug that the workflow should have prevented
• A recurring bug class repeats across fixes

Prefer updating specific sections over adding new rules. After updates, validate that the workflow is still coherent and not overly bureaucratic.