# Trace

Evidence-driven tracing lane that orchestrates competing tracer hypotheses in Claude...

- Repository: https://github.com/Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode (40492 stars)
- Category: AI and agents
- License: MIT
- Last updated: 2026-11-01
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode --skill trace -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode --skill trace -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode --skill trace -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode --skill trace -g -a gemini-cli -y`
Claude Code plugin marketplace: `/plugin marketplace add Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode`

## Description

Evidence-driven tracing lane that orchestrates competing tracer hypotheses in Claude built-in team mode

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

# Trace Skill

Use this skill for ambiguous, causal, evidence-heavy questions where the goal is to explain **why** an observed result happened, not to jump directly into fixing or rewriting code.

This is the orchestration layer on top of the built-in `tracer` agent. The goal is to make tracing feel like a reusable OMC operating lane: restate the observation, generate competing explanations, gather evidence in parallel, rank the explanations, and propose the next probe that would collapse uncertainty fastest.

## Good entry cases

Use `/oh-my-claudecode:trace` when the problem is:

- ambiguous
- causal
- evidence-heavy
- best answered by exploring competing explanations in parallel

Examples:
- runtime bugs and regressions
- performance / latency / resource behavior
- architecture / premortem / postmortem analysis
- scientific or experimental result tracing
- config / routing / orchestration behavior explanation
- “given this output, trace back the likely causes”

## Core tracing contract

Always preserve these distinctions:

1. **Observation** -- what was actually observed
2. **Hypotheses** -- competing explanations
3. **Evidence For** -- what supports each explanation
4. **Evidence Against / Gaps** -- what contradicts it or is still missing
5. **Current Best Explanation** -- the leading explanation right now
6. **Critical Unknown** -- the missing fact keeping the top explanations apart
7. **Discriminating Probe** -- the highest-value next step to collapse uncertainty

Do **not** collapse into:
- a generic fix-it coding loop
- a generic debugger summary
- a raw dump of worker output
- fake certainty when evidence is incomplete

## Evidence strength hierarchy

Treat evidence as ranked, not flat.

From strongest to weakest:

The rest: https://github.com/Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode/blob/HEAD/skills/trace/SKILL.md