{"appId":"copilot-app","version":6,"selectedAngularVersion":20,"item":{"id":"copilot-lesson-165","conceptKey":"copilot-topic-10-debugging-and-error-resolution","subjectId":"copilot-topic-10-debugging-and-error-resolution","title":"Debugging & Error Resolution","summary":"Diagnose compile-time errors, runtime exceptions, dependency problems, and logic defects with Copilot.","baseContent":"<h2>Debugging &amp; Error Resolution</h2><p>Diagnose compile-time errors, runtime exceptions, dependency problems, and logic defects with Copilot.</p><h3>Learning objectives</h3><ul><li>Explain Debugging &amp; Error Resolution in clear language.</li><li>Recognize when it helps and when it does not.</li><li>Apply it in a small, reviewable development workflow.</li><li>Validate AI-generated output before accepting it.</li></ul><h3>Practical developer workflow</h3><ol><li>State the desired outcome and acceptance criteria.</li><li>Provide only the relevant repository context.</li><li>Ask Copilot for a plan or a small change.</li><li>Review every suggestion and generated file.</li><li>Run tests, linting, builds, and security checks appropriate to the change.</li></ol><h3>Easy example</h3><p>Begin with a narrow request that explains one concept or proposes one small change.</p><pre><code>Review this change for correctness, edge cases, security, performance, accessibility, and missing tests. Rank findings by severity and provide a verification step for each.</code></pre><h3>Easy-example verification</h3><ul><li>Check that the response addresses the exact request.</li><li>Compare technical claims with the repository or trusted documentation.</li><li>Do not apply a suggestion until you understand it.</li></ul><h3>Advanced example</h3><p>Use Debugging &amp; Error Resolution in a production task with explicit scope, constraints, review gates, and recovery requirements.</p><pre><code>Plan and implement a production use of Debugging &amp; Error Resolution.\nLimit changes to the named files and preserve public behavior.\nInclude normal, edge, and failure tests.\nRun the relevant lint, test, build, and security checks.\nReport assumptions, evidence, tradeoffs, and rollback steps.</code></pre><h3>Real-world example</h3><p>A development team uses Debugging &amp; Error Resolution while working on a customer-facing application. The team supplies repository rules and acceptance criteria, keeps changes small, reviews the generated diff, and verifies behavior with automated checks and manual inspection.</p><h3>Common mistakes</h3><ul><li>Using a vague request without constraints or success criteria.</li><li>Providing too much irrelevant context or omitting the files that define behavior.</li><li>Accepting generated code, commands, or claims without verification.</li><li>Including secrets, personal data, or restricted source material in prompts.</li><li>Allowing a large change to proceed without checkpoints and rollback.</li></ul><h3>Production perspective</h3><p>Require reproducible failures, targeted tests, measurable acceptance criteria, and human review for high-risk changes.</p><h3>Review checklist</h3><ul><li>Is the intended outcome explicit?</li><li>Is the supplied context relevant and safe?</li><li>Does the result follow repository architecture and standards?</li><li>Were edge cases, security, and accessibility considered?</li><li>Is there test evidence and a safe recovery path?</li></ul>","detailId":"copilot-lesson-165-detail","versions":[],"isActive":true,"detailIsActive":true,"lessonVersions":[],"selectedVersion":20,"content":"","updatedAt":"2026-08-01T10:13:48.230Z","details":[{"id":"copilot-lesson-165","conceptKey":"copilot-topic-10-debugging-and-error-resolution","subjectId":"copilot-topic-10-debugging-and-error-resolution","title":"Debugging & Error Resolution","summary":"Diagnose compile-time errors, runtime exceptions, dependency problems, and logic defects with Copilot.","baseContent":"<h2>Debugging &amp; Error Resolution</h2><p>Diagnose compile-time errors, runtime exceptions, dependency problems, and logic defects with Copilot.</p><h3>Learning objectives</h3><ul><li>Explain Debugging &amp; Error Resolution in clear language.</li><li>Recognize when it helps and when it does not.</li><li>Apply it in a small, reviewable development workflow.</li><li>Validate AI-generated output before accepting it.</li></ul><h3>Practical developer workflow</h3><ol><li>State the desired outcome and acceptance criteria.</li><li>Provide only the relevant repository context.</li><li>Ask Copilot for a plan or a small change.</li><li>Review every suggestion and generated file.</li><li>Run tests, linting, builds, and security checks appropriate to the change.</li></ol><h3>Easy example</h3><p>Begin with a narrow request that explains one concept or proposes one small change.</p><pre><code>Review this change for correctness, edge cases, security, performance, accessibility, and missing tests. Rank findings by severity and provide a verification step for each.</code></pre><h3>Easy-example verification</h3><ul><li>Check that the response addresses the exact request.</li><li>Compare technical claims with the repository or trusted documentation.</li><li>Do not apply a suggestion until you understand it.</li></ul><h3>Advanced example</h3><p>Use Debugging &amp; Error Resolution in a production task with explicit scope, constraints, review gates, and recovery requirements.</p><pre><code>Plan and implement a production use of Debugging &amp; Error Resolution.\nLimit changes to the named files and preserve public behavior.\nInclude normal, edge, and failure tests.\nRun the relevant lint, test, build, and security checks.\nReport assumptions, evidence, tradeoffs, and rollback steps.</code></pre><h3>Real-world example</h3><p>A development team uses Debugging &amp; Error Resolution while working on a customer-facing application. The team supplies repository rules and acceptance criteria, keeps changes small, reviews the generated diff, and verifies behavior with automated checks and manual inspection.</p><h3>Common mistakes</h3><ul><li>Using a vague request without constraints or success criteria.</li><li>Providing too much irrelevant context or omitting the files that define behavior.</li><li>Accepting generated code, commands, or claims without verification.</li><li>Including secrets, personal data, or restricted source material in prompts.</li><li>Allowing a large change to proceed without checkpoints and rollback.</li></ul><h3>Production perspective</h3><p>Require reproducible failures, targeted tests, measurable acceptance criteria, and human review for high-risk changes.</p><h3>Review checklist</h3><ul><li>Is the intended outcome explicit?</li><li>Is the supplied context relevant and safe?</li><li>Does the result follow repository architecture and standards?</li><li>Were edge cases, security, and accessibility considered?</li><li>Is there test evidence and a safe recovery path?</li></ul>","detailId":"copilot-lesson-165-detail","versions":[],"isActive":true,"detailIsActive":true,"lessonVersions":[],"selectedVersion":20,"content":"","updatedAt":"2026-08-01T10:13:48.230Z"}]}}