jackchuka/skills/gh-issue-report/SKILL.md
gh-issue-report
Investigate and file bug reports on GitHub repositories. Searches existing issues to avoid duplicates, checks contributing guides and issue templates, optionally confirms the bug in source code, and files a well-structured issue. Works on both local and remote repos. Triggers: "file a bug", "report issue", "is there a bug for", "check if reported", "investigate and file", "bug report on", "/gh-issue-report"
- Source repository stars
- 15
- Declared platforms
- 0
- Static risk flags
- 1
- Last source update
- 2026-07-28
- Source checked
- 2026-07-28
Decision brief
What it does—and where it fits
Investigate a bug, confirm it hasn't been reported, optionally verify in source code, and file a structured issue — all in one workflow.
Not for
- Searches existing issues to avoid duplicates, checks contributing guides and issue templates, optionally confirms the bug in source code, and files a well-structured issue.
Compatibility matrix
Platform support, with evidence labels
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
Inspect first. Install second.
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/jackchuka/skills --skill "gh-issue-report"Inspect the Agent Skill "gh-issue-report" from https://github.com/jackchuka/skills/blob/7b0b33f68b8f11522e43622e5cb3bacd802999d2/gh-issue-report/SKILL.md at commit 7b0b33f68b8f11522e43622e5cb3bacd802999d2. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
What the source asks the agent to do
- 01
Phase 1: Intake
1. Resolve target repo: - If argument includes owner/repo, use it. - If the current directory is a git repo, offer it as default. - Otherwise, ask.
Resolve target repo:If argument includes owner/repo, use it.If the current directory is a git repo, offer it as default. - 02
Phase 2: Search Existing Issues
4. Search for duplicates using multiple query strategies in parallel:
Search for duplicates using multiple query strategies in parallel:Evaluate matches:If a clear duplicate exists: show it to the user and ask whether to proceed or comment on the existing issue. - 03
Phase 3: Check Repo Conventions
6. Fetch contributing guide and issue templates in parallel:
Fetch contributing guide and issue templates in parallel:Extract conventions: note title prefix (e.g., [bug]), required labels, required sections, and any special instructions from the contributing guide.6. Fetch contributing guide and issue templates in parallel: - 04
Phase 4: Code Investigation
Adapt investigation depth based on what's achievable. Start lightweight; go deeper only when the lightweight pass yields promising leads.
Lightweight pass — identify relevant files:Deep investigation — if the lightweight pass found relevant files (< 10 candidates), read them to understand the bug:Where the relevant state is stored (React state, store, DB, etc.) - 05
Phase 5: Draft Issue
11. Compose the issue following the repo's template and conventions:
Compose the issue following the repo's template and conventions:Title: follow repo convention (e.g., [bug] ...), keep under 80 charsDescription: clear, concise explanation of the bug
Permission review
Static risk signals and limitations
Writes files
The documentation asks the agent to create, modify, or delete local files.
gh issue create -R <repo> \Evidence record
Why each signal appears
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 78/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 15 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
Provenance and original SKILL.md
- Repository
- jackchuka/skills
- Skill path
- gh-issue-report/SKILL.md
- Commit
- 7b0b33f68b8f11522e43622e5cb3bacd802999d2
- License
- MIT
- Collected
- 2026-07-28
- Default branch
- main
View the original SKILL.md
Issue Report
Investigate a bug, confirm it hasn't been reported, optionally verify in source code, and file a structured issue — all in one workflow.
Arguments
/gh-issue-report— interactive: asks for repo and bug description/gh-issue-report <owner/repo> <description>— uses arguments directly
Phase 1: Intake
-
Resolve target repo:
- If argument includes
owner/repo, use it. - If the current directory is a git repo, offer it as default.
- Otherwise, ask.
- If argument includes
-
Bug description: If provided as argument, use it. Otherwise ask:
What bug are you seeing? Include steps to reproduce if you have them.
-
Determine repo locality:
- Check if the repo is cloned locally (look for matching remote in
git remote -vor check common paths). - Local: use file system tools (Read, Grep, Glob) for code investigation.
- Remote-only: use
gh apito fetch repo contents for code investigation.
- Check if the repo is cloned locally (look for matching remote in
Phase 2: Search Existing Issues
-
Search for duplicates using multiple query strategies in parallel:
gh issue list -R <repo> --state all --search "<keywords from description>" --limit 20Run 2-3 searches with different keyword combinations extracted from the bug description (e.g., key nouns, component names, error messages). Cast a wide net.
-
Evaluate matches:
- If a clear duplicate exists: show it to the user and ask whether to proceed or comment on the existing issue.
- If partial matches exist: show them and note the differences.
- If no matches: continue.
Phase 3: Check Repo Conventions
-
Fetch contributing guide and issue templates in parallel:
# Contributing guide gh api 'repos/<repo>/contents/CONTRIBUTING.md' --jq '.content' | base64 -d # Issue templates gh api 'repos/<repo>/contents/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE' --jq '.[].name'If issue templates exist, fetch the relevant one (usually
bug_report.mdorbug_report.yml):gh api 'repos/<repo>/contents/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/<template>' --jq '.content' | base64 -d -
Extract conventions: note title prefix (e.g.,
[bug]), required labels, required sections, and any special instructions from the contributing guide.
Phase 4: Code Investigation
Adapt investigation depth based on what's achievable. Start lightweight; go deeper only when the lightweight pass yields promising leads.
-
Lightweight pass — identify relevant files:
For local repos:
Use Grep/Glob to find files matching component names, error messages, or keywords from the bug description.For remote repos:
gh api 'repos/<repo>/git/trees/main?recursive=1' --jq '.tree[].path' | grep -iE '<keywords>'If this yields no useful results (no matching files, or too many to be actionable), skip to Phase 5 and draft the issue without code-level root cause. Note in the issue body that root cause was not confirmed in code.
-
Deep investigation — if the lightweight pass found relevant files (< 10 candidates), read them to understand the bug:
For local repos: use Read tool directly.
For remote repos:
gh api 'repos/<repo>/contents/<path>' --jq '.content' | base64 -dUse subagents for parallel investigation when reading multiple files. Focus on:
- Where the relevant state is stored (React state, store, DB, etc.)
- What triggers the bug (lifecycle, navigation, race condition, etc.)
- Why the current implementation fails
-
Assess findings:
- Root cause confirmed: include it in the issue with file paths and line references.
- Suspected but unconfirmed: include as hypothesis, clearly labeled.
- Nothing actionable found: omit code analysis from the issue, describe only the observed behavior.
Phase 5: Draft Issue
-
Compose the issue following the repo's template and conventions:
Always include:
- Title: follow repo convention (e.g.,
[bug] ...), keep under 80 chars - Description: clear, concise explanation of the bug
- Steps to reproduce: numbered list
- Expected vs actual behaviour
Include when available:
- Root cause: with file paths and line references from Phase 4
- Suggested fix: if root cause is clear enough to propose a direction
- Environment: platform, version, relevant config
- Title: follow repo convention (e.g.,
-
Infer labels: fetch repo labels and match against the issue content:
gh label list -R <repo> --json name,description --jq '.[] | "\(.name)\t\(.description)"'Only use labels that exist on the repo. If the template specifies a label (e.g.,
bug), use it. -
Present draft to user:
Here's the issue I'll file. Want me to adjust anything?
Show the full title, labels, and body. Wait for approval.
Phase 6: File Issue
-
Create the issue:
gh issue create -R <repo> \ --title "<title>" \ --label "<labels>" \ --body "$(cat <<'EOF' <body> EOF )" -
Report result:
Filed: <issue-url>
Alternatives
Compare before choosing
coreyhaines31/marketingskills
ab-testing
When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program
event4u-app/agent-config
design-review
Use when the user says "review the design", "check the UI", or wants a comprehensive UI/UX review. Uses a 7-phase methodology covering interaction, responsiveness, accessibility, and more.
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
dask
Distributed computing for larger-than-RAM pandas/NumPy workflows. Use when you need to scale existing pandas/NumPy code beyond memory or across clusters. Best for parallel file processing, distributed ML, integration with existing pandas code. For out-of-core analytics on single machine use vaex; for in-memory speed use polars.
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
neurokit2
Use NeuroKit2 to build or audit reproducible research workflows for physiological time-series preprocessing, event/interval analysis, multimodal alignment, variability, and complexity. Trigger when code imports neurokit2 or needs its current APIs, schemas, and method-aware validation—not for diagnosis or device validation.