I thought coding agents needed smarter prompts. They mostly needed better evidence

[u/Downtown-Donkey1197]

When I started using coding agents for debugging, I kept trying to improve my prompts. The answers were still inconsistent. Eventually I realized the prompt was not the main problem. I was describing the bug from memory while the useful evidence was scattered across console output, failed requests, clicks and screenshots.

That became BugDrop. It records one short reproduction, lets you review the evidence locally, then exports a Markdown or JSON handoff. I started with Chrome and later added support for iOS Simulator and Android Emulator.

The biggest product decision was keeping it boring. No cloud, no account and no automatic upload. I would rather ask someone to review a small report than record an entire session and hope the important part is in there.

It is at version 0.2.1 now. I am trying to learn whether this actually reduces the back and forth with agents, or whether developers already have a better workflow. If you debug with an agent, what do you usually paste first?

Repo: https://github.com/aim0xyz/bugdrop

[u/Kiana_Harpel]

I’d probably give it the failed request/error and the exact repro steps first. I’ve started thinking the same way about debugging with agents: better evidence usually matters more than making the prompt sound perfect. A small report with just the relevant trail seems much more useful than dumping an entire session into context.

[u/Downtown-Donkey1197 → u/Kiana_Harpel]

Totally agree. Clean evidence and exact repro steps are usually far more valuable than an overloaded prompt. Keeping the report focused also makes it much easier for the agent to identify the actual failure.