github-triage

SKILL.md

GitHub Triage - Read-Only Analyzer

Architecture

1 ISSUE/PR = 1 task_create = 1 quick SUBAGENT (background). NO EXCEPTIONS.

Rule
Value

Category
quick

Execution
run_in_background=true

Parallelism
ALL items simultaneously

Tracking
task_create per item

Output
/tmp/{YYYYMMDD-HHmmss}/issue-{N}.md or pr-{N}.md

Zero-Action Policy (ABSOLUTE)

<zero_action>
Subagents MUST NEVER run ANY command that writes or mutates GitHub state.

FORBIDDEN (non-exhaustive):
gh issue comment, gh issue close, gh issue edit, gh pr comment, gh pr merge, gh pr review, gh pr edit, gh api -X POST, gh api -X PUT, gh api -X PATCH, gh api -X DELETE

ALLOWED:

gh issue view, gh pr view, gh api (GET only) - read GitHub data

Grep, Read, Glob - read codebase

Write - write report files to /tmp/ ONLY

git log, git show, git blame - read git history (for finding fix commits)

ANY GitHub mutation = CRITICAL violation.
</zero_action>

Evidence Rule (MANDATORY)

A permalink is a URL pointing to a specific line/range in a specific commit, e.g.:
https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}/blob/{commit_sha}/{path}#L{start}-L{end}

How to generate permalinks

Find the relevant file and line(s) via Grep/Read.

Get the current commit SHA: git rev-parse HEAD

Construct: https://github.com/{REPO}/blob/{SHA}/{filepath}#L{line} (or #L{start}-L{end} for ranges)

Rules

No permalink = no claim. If you cannot back a statement with a permalink, state "No evidence found" instead.

Claims without permalinks are explicitly marked [UNVERIFIED] and carry zero weight.

Permalinks to main/master/dev branches are NOT acceptable - use commit SHAs only.

For bug analysis: permalink to the problematic code. For fix verification: permalink to the fixing commit diff.

Phase 0: Setup

REPO=$(gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q .nameWithOwner)
REPORT_DIR="/tmp/$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)"
mkdir -p "$REPORT_DIR"
COMMIT_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

Pass REPO, REPORT_DIR, and COMMIT_SHA to every subagent.

Phase 1: Fetch All Open Items (CORRECTED)

IMPORTANT: body and comments fields may contain control characters that break jq parsing. Fetch basic metadata first, then fetch full details per-item in subagents.

# Step 1: Fetch basic metadata (without body/comments to avoid JSON parsing issues)
ISSUES_LIST=$(gh issue list --repo $REPO --state open --limit 500 \
  --json number,title,labels,author,createdAt)
ISSUE_COUNT=$(echo "$ISSUES_LIST" | jq length)

# Paginate if needed
if [ "$ISSUE_COUNT" -eq 500 ]; then
  LAST_DATE=$(echo "$ISSUES_LIST" | jq -r '.[-1].createdAt')
  while true; do
    PAGE=$(gh issue list --repo $REPO --state open --limit 500 \
      --search "created:<$LAST_DATE" \
      --json number,title,labels,author,createdAt)
    PAGE_COUNT=$(echo "$PAGE" | jq length)
    [ "$PAGE_COUNT" -eq 0 ] && break
    ISSUES_LIST=$(echo "$ISSUES_LIST" "$PAGE" | jq -s '.[0] + .[1] | unique_by(.number)')
    ISSUE_COUNT=$(echo "$ISSUES_LIST" | jq length)
    [ "$PAGE_COUNT" -lt 500 ] && break
    LAST_DATE=$(echo "$PAGE" | jq -r '.[-1].createdAt')
  done
fi

# Same for PRs
PRS_LIST=$(gh pr list --repo $REPO --state open --limit 500 \
  --json number,title,labels,author,headRefName,baseRefName,isDraft,createdAt)
PR_COUNT=$(echo "$PRS_LIST" | jq length)

if [ "$PR_COUNT" -eq 500 ]; then
  LAST_DATE=$(echo "$PRS_LIST" | jq -r '.[-1].createdAt')
  while true; do
    PAGE=$(gh pr list --repo $REPO --state open --limit 500 \
      --search "created:<$LAST_DATE" \
      --json number,title,labels,author,headRefName,baseRefName,isDraft,createdAt)
    PAGE_COUNT=$(echo "$PAGE" | jq length)
    [ "$PAGE_COUNT" -eq 0 ] && break
    PRS_LIST=$(echo "$PRS_LIST" "$PAGE" | jq -s '.[0] + .[1] | unique_by(.number)')
    PR_COUNT=$(echo "$PRS_LIST" | jq length)
    [ "$PAGE_COUNT" -lt 500 ] && break
    LAST_DATE=$(echo "$PAGE" | jq -r '.[-1].createdAt')
  done
fi

echo "Total issues: $ISSUE_COUNT, Total PRs: $PR_COUNT"

LARGE REPOSITORY HANDLING:
If total items exceeds 50, you MUST process ALL items. Use the pagination code above to fetch every single open issue and PR.
DO NOT sample or limit to 50 items - process the entire backlog.

Example: If there are 500 open issues, spawn 500 subagents. If there are 1000 open PRs, spawn 1000 subagents.

Note: Background task system will queue excess tasks automatically.

Phase 2: Classify

Type
Detection

ISSUE_QUESTION
[Question], [Discussion], ?, "how to" / "why does" / "is it possible"

ISSUE_BUG
[Bug], Bug:, error messages, stack traces, unexpected behavior

ISSUE_FEATURE
[Feature], [RFE], [Enhancement], Feature Request, Proposal

ISSUE_OTHER
Anything else

PR_BUGFIX
Title starts with fix, branch contains fix//bugfix/, label bug

PR_OTHER
Everything else

Phase 3: Spawn Subagents (Individual Tool Calls)

CRITICAL: Create tasks ONE BY ONE using individual task_create tool calls. NEVER batch or script.

For each item, execute these steps sequentially:

Step 3.1: Create Task Record

task_create(
  subject="Triage: #{number} {title}",
  description="GitHub {issue|PR} triage analysis - {type}",
  metadata={"type": "{ISSUE_QUESTION|ISSUE_BUG|ISSUE_FEATURE|ISSUE_OTHER|PR_BUGFIX|PR_OTHER}", "number": {number}}
)

Step 3.2: Spawn Analysis Subagent (Background)

task(
  category="quick",
  run_in_background=true,
  load_skills=[],
  prompt=SUBAGENT_PROMPT
)

ABSOLUTE RULES for Subagents:

ONLY ANALYZE - Never take action on GitHub (no comments, merges, closes)

READ-ONLY - Use tools only for reading code/GitHub data

WRITE REPORT ONLY - Output goes to {REPORT_DIR}/{issue|pr}-{number}.md via Write tool

EVIDENCE REQUIRED - Every claim must have GitHub permalink as proof

For each item:
  1. task_create(subject="Triage: #{number} {title}")
  2. task(category="quick", run_in_background=true, load_skills=[], prompt=SUBAGENT_PROMPT)
  3. Store mapping: item_number -> { task_id, background_task_id }

Subagent Prompts

Common Preamble (include in ALL subagent prompts)

CONTEXT:
- Repository: {REPO}
- Report directory: {REPORT_DIR}
- Current commit SHA: {COMMIT_SHA}

PERMALINK FORMAT:
Every factual claim MUST include a permalink: https://github.com/{REPO}/blob/{COMMIT_SHA}/{filepath}#L{start}-L{end}
No permalink = no claim. Mark unverifiable claims as [UNVERIFIED].
To get current SHA if needed: git rev-parse HEAD

ABSOLUTE RULES (violating ANY = critical failure):
- NEVER run gh issue comment, gh issue close, gh issue edit
- NEVER run gh pr comment, gh pr merge, gh pr review, gh pr edit
- NEVER run any gh command with -X POST, -X PUT, -X PATCH, -X DELETE
- NEVER run git checkout, git fetch, git pull, git switch, git worktree
- Your ONLY writable output: {REPORT_DIR}/{issue|pr}-{number}.md via the Write tool

ISSUE_QUESTION

You are analyzing issue #{number} for {REPO}.

ITEM:
- Issue #{number}: {title}
- Author: {author}
- Body: {body}
- Comments: {comments_summary}

TASK:
1. Understand the question.
2. Search the codebase (Grep, Read) for the answer.
3. For every finding, construct a permalink: https://github.com/{REPO}/blob/{COMMIT_SHA}/{path}#L{N}
4. Write report to {REPORT_DIR}/issue-{number}.md

REPORT FORMAT (write this as the file content):

# Issue #{number}: {title}
**Type:** Question | **Author:** {author} | **Created:** {createdAt}

## Question
[1-2 sentence summary]

## Findings
[Each finding with permalink proof. Example:]
- The config is parsed in [`src/config/loader.ts#L42-L58`](https://github.com/{REPO}/blob/{SHA}/src/config/loader.ts#L42-L58)

## Suggested Answer
[Draft answer with code references and permalinks]

## Confidence: [HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW]
[Reason. If LOW: what's missing]

## Recommended Action
[What maintainer should do]

---
REMEMBER: No permalink = no claim. Every code reference needs a permalink.

ISSUE_BUG

You are analyzing bug report #{number} for {REPO}.

ITEM:
- Issue #{number}: {title}
- Author: {author}
- Body: {body}
- Comments: {comments_summary}

TASK:
1. Understand: expected behavior, actual behavior, reproduction steps.
2. Search the codebase for relevant code. Trace the logic.
3. Determine verdict: CONFIRMED_BUG, NOT_A_BUG, ALREADY_FIXED, or UNCLEAR.
4. For ALREADY_FIXED: find the fixing commit using git log/git blame. Include the commit SHA and what changed.
5. For every finding, construct a permalink.
6. Write report to {REPORT_DIR}/issue-{number}.md

FINDING "ALREADY_FIXED" COMMITS:
- Use `git log --all --oneline -- {file}` to find recent changes to relevant files
- Use `git log --all --grep="fix" --grep="{keyword}" --all-match --oneline` to search commit messages
- Use `git blame {file}` to find who last changed the relevant lines
- Use `git show {commit_sha}` to verify the fix
- Construct commit permalink: https://github.com/{REPO}/commit/{fix_commit_sha}

REPORT FORMAT (write this as the file content):

# Issue #{number}: {title}
**Type:** Bug Report | **Author:** {author} | **Created:** {createdAt}

## Bug Summary
**Expected:** [what user expects]
**Actual:** [what actually happens]
**Reproduction:** [steps if provided]

## Verdict: [CONFIRMED_BUG | NOT_A_BUG | ALREADY_FIXED | UNCLEAR]

## Analysis

### Evidence
[Each piece of evidence with permalink. No permalink = mark [UNVERIFIED]]

### Root Cause (if CONFIRMED_BUG)
[Which file, which function, what goes wrong]
- Problematic code: [`{path}#L{N}`](permalink)

### Why Not A Bug (if NOT_A_BUG)
[Rigorous proof with permalinks that current behavior is correct]

### Fix Details (if ALREADY_FIXED)
- **Fixed in commit:** [`{short_sha}`](https://github.com/{REPO}/commit/{full_sha})
- **Fixed date:** {date}
- **What changed:** [description with diff permalink]
- **Fixed by:** {author}

### Blockers (if UNCLEAR)
[What prevents determination, what to investigate next]

## Severity: [LOW | MEDIUM | HIGH | CRITICAL]

## Affected Files
[List with permalinks]

## Suggested Fix (if CONFIRMED_BUG)
[Specific approach: "In {file}#L{N}, change X to Y because Z"]

## Recommended Action
[What maintainer should do]

---
CRITICAL: Claims without permalinks are worthless. If you cannot find evidence, say so explicitly rather than making unverified claims.

ISSUE_FEATURE

You are analyzing feature request #{number} for {REPO}.

ITEM:
- Issue #{number}: {title}
- Author: {author}
- Body: {body}
- Comments: {comments_summary}

TASK:
1. Understand the request.
2. Search codebase for existing (partial/full) implementations.
3. Assess feasibility.
4. Write report to {REPORT_DIR}/issue-{number}.md

REPORT FORMAT (write this as the file content):

# Issue #{number}: {title}
**Type:** Feature Request | **Author:** {author} | **Created:** {createdAt}

## Request Summary
[What the user wants]

## Existing Implementation: [YES_FULLY | YES_PARTIALLY | NO]
[If exists: where, with permalinks to the implementation]

## Feasibility: [EASY | MODERATE | HARD | ARCHITECTURAL_CHANGE]

## Relevant Files
[With permalinks]

## Implementation Notes
[Approach, pitfalls, dependencies]

## Recommended Action
[What maintainer should do]

ISSUE_OTHER

You are analyzing issue #{number} for {REPO}.

ITEM:
- Issue #{number}: {title}
- Author: {author}
- Body: {body}
- Comments: {comments_summary}

TASK: Assess and write report to {REPORT_DIR}/issue-{number}.md

REPORT FORMAT (write this as the file content):

# Issue #{number}: {title}
**Type:** [QUESTION | BUG | FEATURE | DISCUSSION | META | STALE]
**Author:** {author} | **Created:** {createdAt}

## Summary
[1-2 sentences]

## Needs Attention: [YES | NO]
## Suggested Label: [if any]
## Recommended Action: [what maintainer should do]

PR_BUGFIX

You are reviewing PR #{number} for {REPO}.

ITEM:
- PR #{number}: {title}
- Author: {author}
- Base: {baseRefName} <- Head: {headRefName}
- Draft: {isDraft} | Mergeable: {mergeable}
- Review: {reviewDecision} | CI: {statusCheckRollup_summary}
- Body: {body}

TASK:
1. Fetch PR details (READ-ONLY): gh pr view {number} --repo {REPO} --json files,reviews,comments,statusCheckRollup,reviewDecision
2. Read diff: gh api repos/{REPO}/pulls/{number}/files
3. Search codebase to verify fix correctness.
4. Write report to {REPORT_DIR}/pr-{number}.md

REPORT FORMAT (write this as the file content):

# PR #{number}: {title}
**Type:** Bugfix | **Author:** {author}
**Base:** {baseRefName} <- {headRefName} | **Draft:** {isDraft}

## Fix Summary
[What bug, how fixed - with permalinks to changed code]

## Code Review

### Correctness
[Is fix correct? Root cause addressed? Evidence with permalinks]

### Side Effects
[Risky changes, breaking changes - with permalinks if any]

### Code Quality
[Style, patterns, test coverage]

## Merge Readiness

| Check | Status |
|-------|--------|
| CI | [PASS / FAIL / PENDING] |
| Review | [APPROVED / CHANGES_REQUESTED / PENDING / NONE] |
| Mergeable | [YES / NO / CONFLICTED] |
| Draft | [YES / NO] |
| Correctness | [VERIFIED / CONCERNS / UNCLEAR] |
| Risk | [NONE / LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH] |

## Files Changed
[List with brief descriptions]

## Recommended Action: [MERGE | REQUEST_CHANGES | NEEDS_REVIEW | WAIT]
[Reasoning with evidence]

---
NEVER merge. NEVER comment. NEVER review. Write to file ONLY.

PR_OTHER

You are reviewing PR #{number} for {REPO}.

ITEM:
- PR #{number}: {title}
- Author: {author}
- Base: {baseRefName} <- Head: {headRefName}
- Draft: {isDraft} | Mergeable: {mergeable}
- Review: {reviewDecision} | CI: {statusCheckRollup_summary}
- Body: {body}

TASK:
1. Fetch PR details (READ-ONLY): gh pr view {number} --repo {REPO} --json files,reviews,comments,statusCheckRollup,reviewDecision
2. Read diff: gh api repos/{REPO}/pulls/{number}/files
3. Write report to {REPORT_DIR}/pr-{number}.md

REPORT FORMAT (write this as the file content):

# PR #{number}: {title}
**Type:** [FEATURE | REFACTOR | DOCS | CHORE | TEST | OTHER]
**Author:** {author}
**Base:** {baseRefName} <- {headRefName} | **Draft:** {isDraft}

## Summary
[2-3 sentences with permalinks to key changes]

## Status

| Check | Status |
|-------|--------|
| CI | [PASS / FAIL / PENDING] |
| Review | [APPROVED / CHANGES_REQUESTED / PENDING / NONE] |
| Mergeable | [YES / NO / CONFLICTED] |
| Risk | [LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH] |
| Alignment | [YES / NO / UNCLEAR] |

## Files Changed
[Count and key files]

## Blockers
[If any]

## Recommended Action: [MERGE | REQUEST_CHANGES | NEEDS_REVIEW | CLOSE | WAIT]
[Reasoning]

---
NEVER merge. NEVER comment. NEVER review. Write to file ONLY.

Phase 4: Collect & Update

Poll background_output() per task. As each completes:

Parse report.

task_update(id=task_id, status="completed", description=REPORT_SUMMARY)

Stream to user immediately.

Phase 5: Final Summary

Write to {REPORT_DIR}/SUMMARY.md AND display to user:

# GitHub Triage Report - {REPO}

**Date:** {date} | **Commit:** {COMMIT_SHA}
**Items Processed:** {total}
**Report Directory:** {REPORT_DIR}

## Issues ({issue_count})
| Category | Count |
|----------|-------|
| Bug Confirmed | {n} |
| Bug Already Fixed | {n} |
| Not A Bug | {n} |
| Needs Investigation | {n} |
| Question Analyzed | {n} |
| Feature Assessed | {n} |
| Other | {n} |

## PRs ({pr_count})
| Category | Count |
|----------|-------|
| Bugfix Reviewed | {n} |
| Other PR Reviewed | {n} |

## Items Requiring Attention
[Each item: number, title, verdict, 1-line summary, link to report file]

## Report Files
[All generated files with paths]

Anti-Patterns

Violation
Severity

ANY GitHub mutation (comment/close/merge/review/label/edit)
CRITICAL

Claim without permalink
CRITICAL

Using category other than quick
CRITICAL

Batching multiple items into one task
CRITICAL

run_in_background=false
CRITICAL

git checkout on PR branch
CRITICAL

Guessing without codebase evidence
HIGH

Not writing report to {REPORT_DIR}
HIGH

Using branch name instead of commit SHA in permalink
HIGH