📦 deps(skills): sync thirdparty skills
This commit is contained in:
ci[bot]
+9
-9
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
|
||||
# Writing Agent Briefs
|
||||
|
||||
An agent brief is a structured comment posted on a GitHub issue or PR when it moves to `ready-for-agent`. It is the authoritative specification that an AFK agent will work from. The original body and discussion are context — the agent brief is the contract.
|
||||
An agent brief is a structured comment posted on a GitHub issue or PR when it moves to `ready-for-agent`. It is the authoritative specification that an AFK agent will work from. The original body and discussion are context: the agent brief is the contract.
|
||||
|
||||
The brief states **what the agent should do**, which stretches to both surfaces: for an issue, that's building the change from nothing; for a PR, it's what's left to do *to the existing diff* — finish it, close gaps, address review points. Same principles either way; the PR example below shows the difference.
|
||||
The brief states **what the agent should do**, which stretches to both surfaces: for an issue, that's building the change from nothing; for a PR, it's what's left to do *to the existing diff*: finish it, close gaps, address review points. Same principles either way; the PR example below shows the difference.
|
||||
|
||||
## Principles
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ The issue may sit in `ready-for-agent` for days or weeks. The codebase will chan
|
||||
|
||||
- **Do** describe interfaces, types, and behavioral contracts
|
||||
- **Do** name specific types, function signatures, or config shapes that the agent should look for or modify
|
||||
- **Don't** reference file paths — they go stale
|
||||
- **Don't** reference file paths: they go stale
|
||||
- **Don't** reference line numbers
|
||||
- **Don't** assume the current implementation structure will remain the same
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -53,9 +53,9 @@ Describe what should happen after the agent's work is complete.
|
||||
Be specific about edge cases and error conditions.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key interfaces:**
|
||||
- `TypeName` — what needs to change and why
|
||||
- `functionName()` return type — what it currently returns vs what it should return
|
||||
- Config shape — any new configuration options needed
|
||||
- `TypeName`: what needs to change and why
|
||||
- `functionName()` return type: what it currently returns vs what it should return
|
||||
- Config shape: any new configuration options needed
|
||||
|
||||
**Acceptance criteria:**
|
||||
- [ ] Specific, testable criterion 1
|
||||
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ Truncation should break at the last word boundary before 1024 characters
|
||||
and append "..." to indicate truncation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key interfaces:**
|
||||
- The `SkillMetadata` type's `description` field — no type change needed,
|
||||
- The `SkillMetadata` type's `description` field: no type change needed,
|
||||
but the validation/processing logic that populates it needs to respect
|
||||
word boundaries
|
||||
- Any function that reads SKILL.md frontmatter and extracts the description
|
||||
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ requested the feature. When triaging new issues, these files should be
|
||||
checked for matches.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key interfaces:**
|
||||
- Markdown file format in `.out-of-scope/` — each file should have a
|
||||
- Markdown file format in `.out-of-scope/`: each file should have a
|
||||
`# Concept Name` heading, a `**Decision:**` line, a `**Reason:**` line,
|
||||
and a `**Prior requests:**` list with issue links
|
||||
- The triage workflow should read all `.out-of-scope/*.md` files early
|
||||
@@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ remain: errors are still printed as human text (not JSON), and the new flag has
|
||||
no test coverage.
|
||||
|
||||
**Desired behavior:**
|
||||
With `--json`, all output — including errors — is well-formed JSON on stdout,
|
||||
With `--json`, all output (including errors) is well-formed JSON on stdout,
|
||||
and the command's exit codes are unchanged. The existing human-readable output
|
||||
is untouched when the flag is absent.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
+15
-15
@@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
|
||||
|
||||
The `.out-of-scope/` directory in a repo stores persistent records of rejected feature requests. It serves two purposes:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Institutional memory** — why a feature was rejected, so the reasoning isn't lost when the issue is closed
|
||||
2. **Deduplication** — when a new issue comes in that matches a prior rejection, the skill can surface the previous decision instead of re-litigating it
|
||||
1. **Institutional memory**: why a feature was rejected, so the reasoning isn't lost when the issue is closed
|
||||
2. **Deduplication**: when a new issue comes in that matches a prior rejection, the skill can surface the previous decision instead of re-litigating it
|
||||
|
||||
## Directory structure
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ One file per **concept**, not per issue. Multiple issues requesting the same thi
|
||||
|
||||
## File format
|
||||
|
||||
The file should be written in a relaxed, readable style — more like a short design document than a database entry. Use paragraphs, code samples, and examples to make the reasoning clear and useful to someone encountering it for the first time.
|
||||
The file should be written in a relaxed, readable style, more like a short design document than a database entry. Use paragraphs, code samples, and examples to make the reasoning clear and useful to someone encountering it for the first time.
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Dark Mode
|
||||
@@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ interface ThemeConfig {
|
||||
|
||||
## Prior requests
|
||||
|
||||
- #42 — "Add dark mode support"
|
||||
- #87 — "Night theme for accessibility"
|
||||
- #134 — "Dark theme option"
|
||||
- #42: "Add dark mode support"
|
||||
- #87: "Night theme for accessibility"
|
||||
- #134: "Dark theme option"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Naming the file
|
||||
@@ -59,31 +59,31 @@ Use a short, descriptive kebab-case name for the concept: `dark-mode.md`, `plugi
|
||||
|
||||
### Writing the reason
|
||||
|
||||
The reason should be substantive — not "we don't want this" but why. Good reasons reference:
|
||||
The reason should be substantive: not "we don't want this" but why. Good reasons reference:
|
||||
|
||||
- Project scope or philosophy ("This project focuses on X; theming is a downstream concern")
|
||||
- Technical constraints ("Supporting this would require Y, which conflicts with our Z architecture")
|
||||
- Strategic decisions ("We chose to use A instead of B because...")
|
||||
|
||||
The reason should be durable. Avoid referencing temporary circumstances ("we're too busy right now") — those aren't real rejections, they're deferrals.
|
||||
The reason should be durable. Avoid referencing temporary circumstances ("we're too busy right now"); those aren't real rejections, they're deferrals.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to check `.out-of-scope/`
|
||||
|
||||
During triage (Step 1: Gather context), read all files in `.out-of-scope/`. When evaluating a new issue:
|
||||
|
||||
- Check if the request matches an existing out-of-scope concept
|
||||
- Matching is by concept similarity, not keyword — "night theme" matches `dark-mode.md`
|
||||
- If there's a match, surface it to the maintainer: "This is similar to `.out-of-scope/dark-mode.md` — we rejected this before because [reason]. Do you still feel the same way?"
|
||||
- Matching is by concept similarity, not keyword: "night theme" matches `dark-mode.md`
|
||||
- If there's a match, surface it to the maintainer: "This is similar to `.out-of-scope/dark-mode.md`. We rejected this before because [reason]. Do you still feel the same way?"
|
||||
|
||||
The maintainer may:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Confirm** — the new issue gets added to the existing file's "Prior requests" list, then closed
|
||||
- **Reconsider** — the out-of-scope file gets deleted or updated, and the issue proceeds through normal triage
|
||||
- **Disagree** — the issues are related but distinct, proceed with normal triage
|
||||
- **Confirm**: the new issue gets added to the existing file's "Prior requests" list, then closed
|
||||
- **Reconsider**: the out-of-scope file gets deleted or updated, and the issue proceeds through normal triage
|
||||
- **Disagree**: the issues are related but distinct, proceed with normal triage
|
||||
|
||||
## When to write to `.out-of-scope/`
|
||||
|
||||
Only when an **enhancement** (not a bug) is *rejected* as `wontfix`. This applies to enhancement PRs exactly as it does to issues — a rejected PR is recorded here so the same request doesn't return as fresh code.
|
||||
Only when an **enhancement** (not a bug) is *rejected* as `wontfix`. This applies to enhancement PRs exactly as it does to issues: a rejected PR is recorded here so the same request doesn't return as fresh code.
|
||||
|
||||
Do **not** write here when something is closed as `wontfix` because it's **already implemented**. That's a built feature, not a rejected one; recording it would poison the dedup checks with false rejections. Instead, the closing comment points to where the feature already lives.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -101,5 +101,5 @@ The flow:
|
||||
If the maintainer changes their mind about a previously rejected concept:
|
||||
|
||||
- Delete the `.out-of-scope/` file
|
||||
- The skill does not need to reopen old issues — they're historical records
|
||||
- The skill does not need to reopen old issues; they're historical records
|
||||
- The new issue that triggered the reconsideration proceeds through normal triage
|
||||
|
||||
Vendored
+29
-29
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: triage
|
||||
description: Move issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles — categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.
|
||||
description: Move issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles, categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.
|
||||
disable-model-invocation: true
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
|
||||
|
||||
Move issues on the project issue tracker through a small state machine of triage roles.
|
||||
|
||||
If this repo treats external pull requests as a request surface (see the issue-tracker config), triage covers them too: **a PR is an issue with attached code** — same roles, same states, same machine, with a few deltas marked "for a PR" below. Resolve a bare `#42` to an issue or PR per the tracker config.
|
||||
If this repo treats external pull requests as a request surface (see the issue-tracker config), triage covers them too: **a PR is an issue with attached code**, using the same roles, same states, and same machine, with a few deltas marked "for a PR" below. Resolve a bare `#42` to an issue or PR per the tracker config.
|
||||
|
||||
Every comment or issue posted to the issue tracker during triage **must** start with this disclaimer:
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -18,31 +18,31 @@ Every comment or issue posted to the issue tracker during triage **must** start
|
||||
|
||||
## Reference docs
|
||||
|
||||
- [AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md) — how to write durable agent briefs
|
||||
- [OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md) — how the `.out-of-scope/` knowledge base works
|
||||
- [AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md): how to write durable agent briefs
|
||||
- [OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md): how the `.out-of-scope/` knowledge base works
|
||||
|
||||
## Roles
|
||||
|
||||
Two **category** roles:
|
||||
|
||||
- `bug` — something is broken
|
||||
- `enhancement` — new feature or improvement
|
||||
- `bug`: something is broken
|
||||
- `enhancement`: new feature or improvement
|
||||
|
||||
Five **state** roles:
|
||||
|
||||
- `needs-triage` — maintainer needs to evaluate
|
||||
- `needs-info` — waiting on reporter for more information
|
||||
- `ready-for-agent` — fully specified, ready for an AFK agent
|
||||
- `ready-for-human` — needs human implementation
|
||||
- `wontfix` — will not be actioned
|
||||
- `needs-triage`: maintainer needs to evaluate
|
||||
- `needs-info`: waiting on reporter for more information
|
||||
- `ready-for-agent`: fully specified, ready for an AFK agent
|
||||
- `ready-for-human`: needs human implementation
|
||||
- `wontfix`: will not be actioned
|
||||
|
||||
For a PR, the same states read against the attached code: `ready-for-agent` means a brief is attached and an agent should take the next step on the diff; `ready-for-human` means it's ready for a human to merge.
|
||||
|
||||
Every triaged issue should carry exactly one category role and one state role. If state roles conflict, flag it and ask the maintainer before doing anything else.
|
||||
|
||||
These are canonical role names — the actual label strings used in the issue tracker may differ. The mapping should have been provided to you - run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
|
||||
These are canonical role names. The actual label strings used in the issue tracker may differ. The mapping should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
|
||||
|
||||
State transitions: an unlabeled issue normally goes to `needs-triage` first; from there it moves to `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, or `wontfix`. `needs-info` returns to `needs-triage` once the reporter replies. The maintainer can override at any time — flag transitions that look unusual and ask before proceeding.
|
||||
State transitions: an unlabeled issue normally goes to `needs-triage` first; from there it moves to `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, or `wontfix`. `needs-info` returns to `needs-triage` once the reporter replies. The maintainer can override at any time; flag transitions that look unusual and ask before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
## Invocation
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -57,33 +57,33 @@ The maintainer invokes `/triage` and describes what they want in natural languag
|
||||
|
||||
Query the issue tracker and present three buckets, oldest first:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Unlabeled** — never triaged.
|
||||
2. **`needs-triage`** — evaluation in progress.
|
||||
3. **`needs-info` with reporter activity since the last triage notes** — needs re-evaluation.
|
||||
1. **Unlabeled**: never triaged.
|
||||
2. **`needs-triage`**: evaluation in progress.
|
||||
3. **`needs-info` with reporter activity since the last triage notes**: needs re-evaluation.
|
||||
|
||||
When PRs are in scope, include external PRs in these buckets and tag each line `[PR]` or `[issue]`. Discovery surfaces only *external* PRs (the tracker config defines who counts as external) — a collaborator's in-flight PR is not triage work. This filter is discovery-only; an explicitly named PR is always triaged regardless of author.
|
||||
When PRs are in scope, include external PRs in these buckets and tag each line `[PR]` or `[issue]`. Discovery surfaces only *external* PRs (the tracker config defines who counts as external), so a collaborator's in-flight PR is not triage work. This filter is discovery-only; an explicitly named PR is always triaged regardless of author.
|
||||
|
||||
Show counts and a one-line summary per item. Let the maintainer pick.
|
||||
|
||||
## Triage a specific issue or PR
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Gather context.** Read the full issue or PR (body, comments, labels, author, dates; for a PR, the diff too). Parse any prior triage notes so you don't re-ask resolved questions. Explore the codebase using the project's domain glossary, respecting ADRs in the area. Run two checks against the codebase: (a) **redundancy** — search for an existing implementation of the requested behavior by domain concept (not just the request's wording), and report where you looked. If found, it's an already-implemented `wontfix` (step 5). (b) **prior rejection** — read `.out-of-scope/*.md` and surface any that resembles this request.
|
||||
1. **Gather context.** Read the full issue or PR (body, comments, labels, author, dates; for a PR, the diff too). Parse any prior triage notes so you don't re-ask resolved questions. Explore the codebase using the project's domain glossary, respecting ADRs in the area. Run two checks against the codebase: (a) **redundancy**: search for an existing implementation of the requested behavior by domain concept (not just the request's wording), and report where you looked. If found, it's an already-implemented `wontfix` (step 5). (b) **prior rejection**: read `.out-of-scope/*.md` and surface any that resembles this request.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Recommend.** Tell the maintainer your category and state recommendation with reasoning, plus a brief codebase summary relevant to the request — including whether it's already implemented. Wait for direction.
|
||||
2. **Recommend.** Tell the maintainer your category and state recommendation with reasoning, plus a brief codebase summary relevant to the request (including whether it's already implemented). Wait for direction.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Verify the claim.** Before any grilling, check that the claim holds up. For a bug, reproduce it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, confirm the diff does what it claims — check it out, run the relevant tests or commands. Report what happened: confirmed (with code path), failed, or insufficient detail (a strong `needs-info` signal). A confirmed verification makes a much stronger agent brief.
|
||||
3. **Verify the claim.** Before any grilling, check that the claim holds up. For a bug, reproduce it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, confirm the diff does what it claims: check it out, run the relevant tests or commands. Report what happened: confirmed (with code path), failed, or insufficient detail (a strong `needs-info` signal). A confirmed verification makes a much stronger agent brief.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Grill (if needed).** If the request needs fleshing out, run the `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling` skills together — grill it into shape a round of questions at a time, sharpening domain terms and updating `CONTEXT.md`/ADRs inline as decisions land.
|
||||
4. **Grill (if needed).** If the request needs fleshing out, call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling", and grill it into shape a round of questions at a time, sharpening domain terms and updating `CONTEXT.md`/ADRs inline as decisions land.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Apply the outcome:**
|
||||
- `ready-for-agent` — post an agent brief comment ([AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md)).
|
||||
- `ready-for-human` — same structure as an agent brief, but note why it can't be delegated (judgment calls, external access, design decisions, manual testing).
|
||||
- `needs-info` — post triage notes (template below).
|
||||
- `wontfix` — close, with the comment depending on *why*:
|
||||
- **Already implemented** — the change already exists in the codebase. Point to where it lives; do **not** write to `.out-of-scope/` (that KB is for *rejected* requests, not built ones).
|
||||
- **Rejected (bug)** — polite explanation, then close.
|
||||
- **Rejected (enhancement)** — write to `.out-of-scope/`, link to it from a comment, then close ([OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md)).
|
||||
- `needs-triage` — apply the role. Optional comment if there's partial progress.
|
||||
- `ready-for-agent`: post an agent brief comment ([AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md)).
|
||||
- `ready-for-human`: same structure as an agent brief, but note why it can't be delegated (judgment calls, external access, design decisions, manual testing).
|
||||
- `needs-info`: post triage notes (template below).
|
||||
- For `wontfix`, close the issue, with the comment depending on *why*:
|
||||
- **Already implemented**: the change already exists in the codebase. Point to where it lives; do **not** write to `.out-of-scope/` (that KB is for *rejected* requests, not built ones).
|
||||
- **Rejected (bug)**: give a polite explanation, then close.
|
||||
- **Rejected (enhancement)**: write to `.out-of-scope/`, link to it from a comment, then close ([OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md)).
|
||||
- `needs-triage`: apply the role. Optional comment if there's partial progress.
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick state override
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user