Generated banner for Warp Debug Gradients
Generated logo for Warp Debug Gradients

Warp Debug Gradients

NVIDIAOfficialCreated by Warp TeamDistributed by NVIDIA

  • Skill
  • Review and audit
  • Software development
  • Apache-2.0
  • Medium risk
  • Has scripts

From the author

Use to diagnose and fix incorrect gradients in differentiable Warp programs. Anything trained, optimized, calibrated, or fit through Warp kernels depends on wp.Tape gradients, so treat any misbehavior of such a workflow as a gradient problem until proven otherwise — use this when training diverges or NaNs, won't train at all, stalls or plateaus above the expected loss, converges to a wrong or biased answer, is worse than a reference implementation, works at small scale but fails at production scale, or fails a QA/validation recheck. Also for explicit symptoms — exploding, NaN/inf, zero, or subtly wrong gradients, suspected wp.Tape/backward issues, gradcheck failures — but users usually describe only the surface symptom ("the sim explodes", "the fit gets dragged toward outliers") without mentioning gradients: make that leap. Not for forward-only Warp work, build/install problems, or autograd issues in other frameworks without Warp.
— the description by Warp Team

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

Gradient bugs in Warp are rarely mathematical errors; they are almost always structural issues in how the tape records operations or how memory is managed during the backward pass. This skill provides a rigorous, evidence-based methodology to identify and fix these bugs. By moving from surface-level symptoms—such as training divergence, NaNs, or stalled loss—to verifying the underlying gradient signature, you can isolate issues like write-after-read overwrites, accidental gradient truncation, or incorrect taping patterns. The process emphasizes measurement over intuition, utilizing Warp's built-in verification tools and finite-difference checks to confirm the root cause before applying minimal, structural fixes.

What it does

  • Identifies root causes of gradient-related failures in differentiable Warp workflows.
  • Provides a systematic checklist for common bug patterns like buffer reuse and state aliasing.
  • Guides the use of Warp's autograd verification tools to detect array access violations.
  • Implements finite-difference harnesses to establish ground truth and validate gradient correctness.
  • Helps distinguish between gradient bugs and other issues like learning rate or physics instability.
  • Offers strategies for structural fixes, including gradient checkpointing and dataflow restructuring.

When to use it

  • When training, optimization, or fitting through Warp kernels diverges, produces NaNs, or fails to converge.
  • When loss stalls, plateaus unexpectedly, or produces biased results.
  • When explicit gradient symptoms occur, such as exploding gradients, zero gradients, or gradcheck failures.
  • When a pipeline works at small scale but fails at production scale or during validation.
  • When you need to verify if a custom gradient implementation is correctly integrated into the backward pass.

Advantages

  • Reduces time spent on trial-and-error tuning of physics or loss functions.
  • Provides objective evidence for fixes through finite-difference comparison.
  • Prevents common pitfalls like silent gradient clobbering and accidental truncation.
  • Ensures fixes are structural and robust rather than just masking surface symptoms.
  • Leverages official Warp diagnostic tools for reliable, version-aware verification.

Usage examples

“My simulation training is producing NaNs after a few iterations. How do I debug this?”
The agent will guide you to enable the autograd overwrite tracker, shrink the simulation to a minimal reproducible case, and run a finite-difference check to identify if the NaN originates from a specific kernel or a dataflow overwrite.
“The gradients in my Warp model seem to be zero. What should I check?”
The agent will help you verify if the loss is correctly connected to the tape, check for piecewise-constant operations that require surrogate gradients, and confirm that kernels are not compiled with enable_backward=False.
“My optimization loss is worse than my reference implementation. Are my gradients wrong?”
The agent will assist in setting up an end-to-end finite-difference harness to compare your autodiff gradients against the objective, confirming whether the discrepancy is a gradient bug or a separate issue like learning rate.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/nvidia/warp-debug-gradients/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip warp-debug-gradients.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by Warp Team

Debugging Gradients in Warp

Gradient bugs in Warp are almost never math bugs. The forward simulation looks perfectly healthy while the backward pass silently reads clobbered values, skips arrays, or double-counts adjoints. Users routinely burn days tuning physics knobs, loss functions, and assets when the real cause is a two-line taping-pattern fix. Your job is to find that fix with evidence, not intuition.

The single most important discipline: measure before hypothesizing. It is cheap for you to run a shrunk reproduction and compare autodiff against finite differences. The way the gradient is wrong (its signature) prunes the hypothesis space far faster than reading code ever will. Do not start proposing fixes from code reading alone — plausible-looking diagnoses of differentiability bugs are very often wrong, and an unverified "fix" that happens to perturb the numbers wastes everyone's time.

When to Use This Skill

Anything trained, optimized, calibrated, or fit through Warp kernels flows through wp.Tape gradients — so when such a workflow misbehaves, gradients are the prime suspect even if the user never says the word. Activate on the symptoms users actually report: training that diverges, NaNs, or does nothing; loss that stalls or plateaus above where it should; fits that converge to a wrong or biased answer or are worse than a reference implementation; pipelines that work at small scale but fail at production scale or fail a QA recheck. Also activate on explicit gradient symptoms — exploding, NaN/inf, zero, or subtly wrong gradients, wp.autograd.gradcheck failures, suspected wp.Tape/backward issues — and when the user asks whether their gradients can be trusted.

Do not activate for forward-only Warp work (kernel authoring, rendering, performance tuning), Warp build or installation problems, autograd questions in other frameworks with no Warp involvement, or pure performance work on a backward pass whose gradients the user has already validated.

The canonical background is Warp's own documentation — consult the relevant section before diagnosing in its territory (online at https://nvidia.github.io/warp/stable/; in a Warp source checkout the same content is under docs/user_guide/; pip installs do not include it):

  • The "Differentiability" guide — especially "Array Overwrites", "Debugging Gradients", "Array Overwrite Tracking", and "Limitations and Workarounds" (in-place math, component assignment, dynamic loops).

  • The FAQ, section "Differentiation and Interoperability" — what state a tape does and does not preserve, and checkpointing.

Prerequisites

Executing this skill assumes all of the following; if one is missing, surface that to the user instead of improvising around it:

  • The user's script (or a faithful reproduction) is available in the workspace, runnable, and modifiable — diagnosis executes it repeatedly and edits it to apply fixes.

  • This skill's references/ files (quick-checks.md, verification.md, custom-gradients.md, case-studies.md) accompany it and are consulted at the steps that cite them.

Instructions

  1. Note the user's Warp version first (wp.__version__ or the banner Warp prints at init). Several verification behaviors changed in Warp 1.17 — copy-adjoint accumulation, overwrite-warning call sites, read-flag lifetime, gradcheck's restore_inputs — and the references mark each with a version caveat. On Warp < 1.17, a whole bug class exists that later versions fixed (quick-checks §1's version caveat), and some tools need workarounds.

  2. Reproduce and shrink. Get the user's script running, then cut it down: fewer particles/elements, fewer time steps, fewer optimizer iterations, CPU device if the sim allows. You need a repro that runs in seconds, because you will run it many times. Keep the structure (number of kernels, the taping pattern, buffer reuse) intact — that is where the bug lives. Shrinking the physics is fine; restructuring the dataflow is not.

    If the script cannot be made to run (missing dependencies, broken code), report the blocking issue as the deliverable and stop — do not proceed to verify a program that never ran.

  3. Instrument and establish ground truth (details and templates in references/verification.md):

    • Set wp.config.verify_autograd_array_access = True before module load and rerun under an active tape. Capture every warning. This catches the single most common bug class (write-after-read overwrites) nearly for free. Know its blind spots: it needs a tape, it cannot see arrays stored inside Warp structs, and it disables kernel caching (expect a kernel rebuild — JIT module recompilation only, not a rebuild of the native library). If the tracker runs clean but gradients are still wrong, specifically check for in-place mutations of arrays held inside Warp structs (quick-checks §1 and Limitations) before trusting the clean result.

    • Run one end-to-end finite-difference check: wrap the full forward pass (sim steps + loss) in a Python callable and hand it to wp.autograd.gradcheck with the true optimization inputs — it compares the autodiff gradient against central differences, restoring array inputs between evaluations (Warp 1.17+) so in-place-mutating forwards are checked from pristine state; on older Warp use the manual harness in references/verification.md. The reference is the user's actual objective over the full horizon, compared against the gradient the optimizer actually consumes — never a narrower window (see references/verification.md). This confirms gradients are actually wrong (users are sometimes wrong about this — report "gradients are correct" findings honestly) and yields the error signature. The template in references/verification.md fixes the eps/tolerance choices and the seed-pinning a stochastic forward needs — do not eyeball pass/fail against floating-point or sampling noise. If the backward pass runs out of memory while establishing ground truth, apply the checkpointing pattern from "Edge case: out of memory" below before proceeding.

  4. Match the signature against the table below to rank hypotheses.

  5. Scan the code against the known-pattern checklist (references/quick-checks.md). This is fast for you — do it in the same pass, but let the signature decide which findings are plausible causes versus incidental smells.

  6. Localize if still ambiguous. Binary-search the pipeline: truncate to K steps and find where FD and autodiff first diverge; run wp.autograd.gradcheck_tape to test each recorded launch in isolation. Remember gradcheck_tape validates kernels individually — it is structurally blind to inter-kernel overwrites, so a clean per-kernel pass plus a wrong end-to-end gradient points at the taping pattern, not the kernels. It also silently skips kernels compiled with enable_backward=False (see Limitations) — if any kernel in the pipeline sets that, a clean pass says nothing about it; verify it separately.

  7. Fix minimally, then re-verify with the exact same FD harness that established the failure. A gradient fix without a before/after FD comparison is not a fix. Verify the exact program you are shipping — the fixed file as it stands, every line included — never a re-implementation of it in a diagnostic script: a rebuilt pipeline silently drops whatever you believed was irrelevant, and if that belief is wrong the verification passes while the shipped code stays broken. Mechanically: the harness must import the fixed module (or execute the fixed file) and call into it — the only code that may live outside the shipped program is the FD driver itself. Also rerun the overwrite tracker to confirm the warnings are gone. "Minimally" applies to the code diff, not the diagnosis: when the root cause is structural (e.g., accidental gradient truncation, quick-checks §8), the minimal correct fix is the restructure — do not substitute a smaller change that only silences the surface symptom.

  8. Close the loop on the user's original complaint. Rerun their actual workflow (their script, their printed metrics). The job is done when the symptom they reported is resolved — an optimization that was "exploding" should now demonstrably improve its objective, not merely avoid NaN. If gradients verify correct at the full horizon but training still fails, that is a new signature-table entry, not a victory; keep diagnosing (or report the verified gradients and the remaining non-gradient cause, e.g. learning rate).

Failure signatures

SignatureLeading hypotheses
Gradients exactly zeroMissing requires_grad=True somewhere in the chain (note wp.zeros defaults to False; zeros_like/clone inherit from source); enable_backward=False at module/kernel level; loss array not connected to the tape; grads read after tape.zero(); a piecewise-constant op (round/floor/sign/cast/threshold) in the chain — there zero is correct and the fix is a surrogate gradient such as a straight-through estimator, not a bug hunt (quick-checks §9c); on Warp < 1.17, a tape-recorded copy/clone whose source has other downstream readers (see the version caveat in references/quick-checks.md)
Gradients grow without bound across optimizer iterationsMissing tape.zero()/tape.reset() between iterations; state-object aliasing that carries an in-tape overwrite across frames (case study 1)
Off by an exact small factor (2x, Nx)Double accumulation: a duplicate launch recorded on the tape — note that since Warp 1.13 the store adjoint consumes the output gradient on first use, so a bare duplicate is inert unless the rewritten array has retain_grad=True (quick-checks §7) or the Warp version is older; overlapping tape scopes taping the same work twice. Also: a backward seed that does not match the stated objective — seeding a per-element loss adjoint with ones backpropagates the sum, exactly N× the mean objective's gradient
NaN or infNon-differentiable point evaluated in the backward pass (wp.sqrt(0), wp.length(0), wp.normalize(0), division) — needs a custom gradient (references/custom-gradients.md) or, better, a stable reformulation; an overflow evaluated in the unselected branch of wp.where (a select, not a branch — quick-checks §9b); dynamic-loop local not recomputed during replay (documented to produce inf)
Subtly wrong, often worse with more steps/iterationsWrite-after-read overwrite: wp.copy onto an already-read array, ping-pong buffers within one tape, Python rebinding that aliases two "different" states (case studies); in-place *=//=; vector/matrix component reassignment; dynamic-loop intermediates; on Warp < 1.17, a recorded copy/clone that is not the last consumer of its source (version caveat in references/quick-checks.md)
Per-window FD agrees but full-horizon FD disagrees; or gradients "verified" yet the optimizer stalls or worsens the lossAccidental gradient truncation: a tape-per-step loop with backward inside it and state carried between tapes optimizes a different objective than the one being reported (see quick-checks §8). The structural fix is one tape over the whole horizon with total_steps + 1 distinct state buffers. The solver-space analog: a partially converged iterative solve inside the tape makes FD and autodiff agree on the wrong program — converge it outside the tape and warm-start the taped iterations (quick-checks §8)
Gradients disagree (vs a reference implementation or run-to-run) only on a sparse, data-dependent subset; forward outputs match to float precisionUnder-determined forward choice at a non-smooth point (quick-checks §9): both answers can be valid subgradients, and FD cannot adjudicate at a kink. Check whether the discrete choice differs at exactly the mismatching elements before hunting corruption
FD and autodiff agree at the full horizon but optimization still failsNot a gradient bug. Say so. Look at learning rate, loss landscape, physics stability — and report the verified-correct gradients as the finding

Examples

A representative session, end to end. A user reports "my cloth sim trains for a while, then the loss creeps back up — tuning the learning rate doesn't help." No mention of gradients; the leap is made because the workflow optimizes through Warp kernels.

  1. Their script runs 512 particles for 200 steps per iteration. Shrink to 16 particles, 10 steps, CPU — repro now runs in ~2 s and shows the same creep.

  2. wp.config.verify_autograd_array_access = True under the tape prints: array ... was read from kernel integrate and is now being written to by kernel integrate — a write-after-read overwrite.

  3. End-to-end wp.autograd.gradcheck on the shrunk repro: max relative error 0.4 against finite differences. Gradients are confirmed wrong, with the "subtly wrong, worse with more steps" signature.

  4. The signature row plus quick-checks §1 point at buffer reuse inside one tape: the sim steps state_a → state_b → state_a, ping-ponging two buffers, so the backward pass reads clobbered states.

  5. Minimal fix: allocate num_steps + 1 distinct state buffers recorded on the tape (physics untouched; only the dataflow changes).

  6. Re-verify: same gradcheck harness now passes (max relative error 3e-4); the overwrite warning is gone; the user's full-size training run now decreases monotonically.

Report: root cause (in-tape buffer reuse), the evidence chain (warning + before/after FD numbers), the two-line diff, and a pointer to the "Array Overwrites" section of the Differentiability guide.

Reporting

Lead with the root cause and the evidence chain: the FD-vs-autodiff numbers that established the failure, the warning or localization step that found the cause, the minimal diff, and the FD numbers after the fix. Name the documentation section that covers the pattern so the user can read the canonical explanation. If you checked patterns that came up clean (e.g., the overwrite tracker found nothing), say so — it tells the user what has been ruled out.

If the user is only asking whether their gradients are trustworthy, stop after verification and report; apply fixes when they ask for fixes.

Preserve the evidence: leave the diagnostic scripts (FD harness, shrunk repro) in the workspace and list them in the report instead of deleting them — they are the reproducible half of the evidence chain, and the user or a reviewer should be able to rerun the exact verification that justified the fix. Never delete files you did not create.

Limitations

The verification tooling has blind spots — a clean pass through any one tool is not a clean bill of health (details in references/verification.md):

  • The overwrite tracker requires an active tape, cannot see arrays stored inside Warp structs, and disables kernel caching while enabled.

  • wp.autograd.gradcheck does not accept struct inputs; wrap the forward in a callable over the underlying arrays. On Warp < 1.17 it does not restore mutated array inputs between evaluations (use the manual harness).

  • wp.autograd.gradcheck_tape validates each recorded launch in isolation — it is structurally blind to inter-kernel overwrite bugs and silently skips kernels compiled with enable_backward=False.

  • The *=//= non-differentiability warning is emitted only at codegen time under wp.LOG_DEBUG, so its absence from a normal run means nothing.

  • Warp has no built-in gradient checkpointing; long-horizon memory pressure needs the application-level pattern below.

  • At non-smooth points (ties, kinks, argmin selections), finite differences cannot adjudicate between valid subgradients — FD-vs-AD disagreement there is not automatically a bug (quick-checks §9).

Edge case: out of memory

If the backward pass fails to allocate (long simulations keep every intermediate state alive on the tape), the fix is gradient checkpointing: save periodic states, replay the segments between them during backward. Warp has no built-in utility — applications implement it themselves. Use warp/examples/optim/example_fluid_checkpoint.py as the reference pattern, and see the FAQ's "Differentiation and Interoperability" section.

Reference files

  • references/quick-checks.md — the known-bug-pattern checklist with doc pointers and the caveats that make each pattern easy to miss.

  • references/verification.md — tooling details: overwrite tracker setup and blind spots, end-to-end FD harness template, wp.autograd gradcheck/jacobian usage and caveats, tape visualization, bisection.

  • references/custom-gradients.md — @wp.func_grad, @wp.func_replay, @wp.func_native: when they are required and how they are misused.

  • references/case-studies.md — two real debugging sagas (state aliasing; differentiable-copy overwrite) showing how subtle the surface symptoms are. Read these when the checklist comes up clean — they calibrate what "subtle" means here.

Files

LICENSE

Copyright (c) 2026 NVIDIA CORPORATION & AFFILIATES. All rights reserved.


                                 Apache License
                           Version 2.0, January 2004
                        http://www.apache.org/licenses/

   TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION

   1. Definitions.

      "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction,
      and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document.

      "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by
      the copyright owner that is granting the License.

      "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all
      other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common
      control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,
      "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the
      direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or
      otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
      outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.

      "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity
      exercising permissions granted by this License.

      "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications,
      including but not limited to software source code, documentation
      source, and configuration files.

      "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical
      transformation or translation of a Source form, including but
      not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,
      and conversions to other media types.

      "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
      Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
      copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work
      (an example is provided in the Appendix below).

      "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object
      form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the
      editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
      represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes
      of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain
      separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,
      the Work and Derivative Works thereof.

      "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
      the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions
      to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
      submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner
      or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of
      the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted"
      means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent
      to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to
      communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,
      and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the
      Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
      excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
      designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution."

      "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity
      on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and
      subsequently incorporated within the Work.

   2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
      copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,
      publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the
      Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.

   3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
      (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made,
      use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,
      where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable
      by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their
      Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
      with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You
      institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
      cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
      or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
      or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
      granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
      as of the date such litigation is filed.

   4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
      Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
      modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
      meet the following conditions:

      (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or
          Derivative Works a copy of this License; and

      (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
          stating that You changed the files; and

      (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
          that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
          attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
          excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
          the Derivative Works; and

      (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
          distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
          include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
          within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
          pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
          of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
          as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
          documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
          within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
          wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
          of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
          do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
          notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
          or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
          that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
          as modifying the License.

      You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and
      may provide additional or different license terms and conditions
      for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or
      for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,
      reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with
      the conditions stated in this License.

   5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
      any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
      by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
      this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
      Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
      the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
      with Licensor regarding such Contributions.

   6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
      names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,
      except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the
      origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.

   7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or
      agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each
      Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS,
      WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
      implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions
      of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A
      PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the
      appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any
      risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.

   8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,
      whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,
      unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly
      negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be
      liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special,
      incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a
      result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the
      Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,
      work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all
      other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor
      has been advised of the possibility of such damages.

   9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing
      the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
      and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
      or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
      License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
      on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
      of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,
      defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability
      incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason
      of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.

   END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS

   APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.

      To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
      identification within third-party archives.

   Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]

   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
   you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
   You may obtain a copy of the License at

       http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
   distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
   WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
   See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
   limitations under the License.

Requirements and compatibility

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Needs: Needs Python

The author says: Requires a working NVIDIA Warp installation (>= 1.13 minimum; >= 1.17 recommended for reliable verification — copy-adjoint accumulation, overwrite-warning call sites, read-flag lifetime, and gradcheck's restore_inputs changed in 1.17 and are version-caveated in the references; on older versions a fixed bug class still exists and some tools need workarounds). Diagnosis runs the user's reproduction, so a functioning device (CPU or CUDA) is needed.

Security

What our scanner noticed· Medium risk

  • Large base64-encoded blobs
  • Scripts that your agent may run

This skill includes scripts that your agent may run. Read them before you use it.

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Created by
Warp Team
Publisher
NVIDIA (Official)
Distributed by
NVIDIA
Source
NVIDIA/skills · skills/warp-debug-gradients · commit fce3cca
Licence
Apache License 2.0 (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE-APACHE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Warp Team or NVIDIA.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download warp-debug-gradients.zip