Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

issue-triage

Sort open GitHub issues by category, risk, inactivity, and possible duplication. Examine selected reports in detail, identify missing information, and prepare comments, labels, or closures for user approval before taking action.

OriginalShow the original description

3-phase issue backlog management with audit, deep analysis, and validated triage actions. Use when triaging GitHub issues, sorting bug reports, cleaning up stale tickets, or detecting duplicate issues. Args: 'all' to analyze all, issue numbers to focus (e.g. '42 57'), 'en'/'fr' for language, no arg = audit only.

Works withGitHub
See how to install

Good for

  • Sort accumulated bug reports and feature requests
  • Check possible duplicates against open and closed issues
  • Review inactive issues for follow-up or closure
  • Approve comments, labels, and closures before execution

Files included (2)

  • SKILL.md14.9 KB
  • templates/issue-comment.md3.4 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Issue triage

3-phase workflow for maintainers: automated audit of all open issues, opt-in deep analysis via parallel agents, and validated triage actions (comments, labels, closures).

When to use this skill

SkillUsageOutput
/issue-triageSort, analyze, and act on an issue backlogTriage tables + analysis + executed actions
/pr-triageSort, review, and comment on a PR backlogTriage table + reviews + posted comments

Triggers:

  • Manually: /issue-triage or /issue-triage all or /issue-triage 42 57
  • Proactively: when >10 open issues without label, or stale issues >30 days detected

Language

  • Check the argument passed to the skill
  • If en or english → tables and summary in English
  • If fr, french, or no argument → French (default)
  • Note: GitHub comments and labels (Phase 3) are ALWAYS in English (international audience)

Configuration

Thresholds used throughout the workflow. Edit to match your project:

ParameterDefaultDescription
staleness_days30Days without activity before flagging as stale
very_stale_days90Days without activity before flagging as very stale
jaccard_threshold60%Minimum Jaccard similarity to flag two issues as duplicates
closed_compare_count20Number of recent closed issues to compare for duplicate detection
open_limit100Maximum open issues to fetch and analyze

Preconditions

git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree
gh auth status

If either fails, stop and explain what is missing.


Phase 1: Audit (always executed)

Data Gathering (parallel commands)

# Repo identity
gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q .nameWithOwner

# Open issues (exclude PRs, limit 100)
gh issue list --state open --limit 100 \
  --json number,title,author,createdAt,updatedAt,labels,body,comments,assignees,milestone

# Recent closed issues (for duplicate detection)
gh issue list --state closed --limit 20 \
  --json number,title,body,labels,stateReason

# Open PRs (bodies for cross-reference detection)
gh pr list --state open --limit 50 --json number,title,body

# Collaborators (to distinguish reporter types)
gh api "repos/{owner}/{repo}/collaborators" --jq '.[].login'

Collaborators fallback: if gh api .../collaborators returns 403/404:

# Extract authors from last 10 merged PRs
gh pr list --state merged --limit 10 --json author --jq '.[].author.login' | sort -u

If still ambiguous, ask via AskUserQuestion.

Note: comments field in gh issue list --json comments returns the count, not content. For Phase 2, fetch full content separately: gh issue view {num} --json comments.

Analysis dimensions

Run all 6 dimensions for each open issue:

1. Categorization

Classify each issue by reading title + first 200 chars of body:

CategoryLabelCriteria
BugbugDescribes broken behavior, unexpected output, crash
Feature RequestenhancementAsks for new functionality
Question / SupportquestionUser asking how something works
DocumentationdocumentationMissing or incorrect docs
Out of ScopewontfixClearly outside project boundaries
Unclearneeds-infoBody empty, too vague to categorize

If body is empty → category is always Unclear (never assume).

2. Cross-reference to PRs

Scan each open PR body for references to the issue number:

  • Patterns: fixes #N, closes #N, resolves #N, fix #N, close #N (case-insensitive, N = issue number)
  • Use regex locally on the body fields already fetched; do NOT make N additional API calls
  • If found: flag issue as "PR-linked" with PR number

3. Duplicate detection via Jaccard similarity

Algorithm (self-contained, no external library):

For each open issue, compute Jaccard similarity against all other open issues AND the 20 most recent closed issues.

Step 1: Normalize title + first 300 chars of body:
  - Lowercase the full text
  - Strip category prefixes: "feat:", "fix:", "bug:", "chore:", "docs:", "test:", "refactor:"
  - Remove punctuation: .,!?;:'"()[]{}-_/\@#

Step 2: Tokenize:
  - Split on whitespace
  - Remove stop words: the a an is in on to for of and or with this that it can not no be
  - Remove tokens shorter than 3 characters

Step 3: Compute Jaccard:
  tokens_A = set of tokens from issue A
  tokens_B = set of tokens from issue B
  jaccard = |tokens_A ∩ tokens_B| / |tokens_A ∪ tokens_B|

Step 4: Flag:
  - If jaccard >= 0.60: mark as potential duplicate
  - Report: "Similar to #N (Jaccard: 0.72)"
  - Keep the OLDER issue as canonical; newer = duplicate candidate

Jaccard is computed at runtime using the fetched data; no API calls beyond Phase 1 gather.

4. Risk classification

Assign Red / Yellow / Green based on signals in title + body:

LevelColorCriteria
CriticalRedSecurity vulnerability, data loss, regression blocking users, crash in production
Needs AttentionYellowMissing validation, performance degradation, breaking change undocumented, Unclear with no response for >7 days
NormalGreenEverything else

5. Staleness

StatusCriterion
ActiveUpdated within 30 days
StaleNo activity 30–90 days
Very StaleNo activity >90 days

Use updatedAt field. Staleness does NOT depend on comments count; a commented-on issue with old updatedAt is still stale.

6. Recommendations

One recommended action per issue:

SituationAction
Category = Unclear, body emptyComment requesting details
Jaccard >= 0.60 with known issueClose as duplicate, link original
Very stale + no assigneeComment requesting status, suggest close
Risk = RedPin to top of triage, escalate immediately
Category = OOSClose with explanation
PR-linkedNo action needed (tracked via PR)
Normal + labeledNo action needed

Output: Triage tables

## Open Issues ({count})

### Critical: Immediate Attention (Risk: Red)
| # | Title | Category | Reporter | Days Open | Action |
|---|-------|----------|----------|-----------|--------|

### PR-Linked (tracked in open PRs)
| # | Title | Category | PR | Days Open |
|---|-------|----------|----|-----------|

### Active Issues
| # | Title | Category | Labels | Reporter | Days | Action |
|---|-------|----------|--------|----------|------|--------|

### Duplicate Candidates
| # | Title | Similar To | Jaccard | Action |
|---|-------|------------|---------|--------|

### Stale Issues
| # | Title | Category | Last Activity | Reporter | Action |
|---|-------|----------|---------------|----------|--------|

### Summary
- Total open: {N}
- Critical (Red): {count}
- PR-linked: {count}
- Duplicate candidates: {count}
- Stale (30–90d): {count}
- Very stale (>90d): {count}
- Unlabeled: {count}
- Recommended actions: {comment: N, label: N, close: N}

0 issues → display No open issues. and stop.

Protection rules (apply to all phases):

  • Never close an issue authored by a collaborator without explicit user confirmation
  • Never re-label an issue that already has labels (only add missing labels)
  • If body is empty → always request details before any other action
  • Never auto-close a Red issue without user confirmation

Automatic copy

After displaying the triage tables, copy to clipboard using platform-appropriate command:

UNAME=$(uname -s)
if [ "$UNAME" = "Darwin" ]; then
  pbcopy <<'EOF'
{full triage tables}
EOF
elif command -v xclip &>/dev/null; then
  echo "{full triage tables}" | xclip -selection clipboard
elif command -v wl-copy &>/dev/null; then
  echo "{full triage tables}" | wl-copy
elif command -v clip.exe &>/dev/null; then
  echo "{full triage tables}" | clip.exe
fi

Confirm: Triage tables copied to clipboard. (EN) / Tableaux copiés dans le presse-papier. (FR)


Phase 2: Deep Analysis (opt-in)

Issue selection

If argument passed:

  • "all" → all issues with recommended actions
  • Numbers ("42 57") → only those issues
  • No argument → propose via AskUserQuestion

If no argument, display:

question: "Which issues do you want to analyze in depth?"
header: "Deep Analysis"
multiSelect: true
options:
  - label: "All ({N} issues with recommended actions)"
    description: "Launch parallel analysis agents for each actionable issue"
  - label: "Critical only ({M} Red issues)"
    description: "Focus on high-risk issues requiring immediate action"
  - label: "Duplicate candidates ({K} issues)"
    description: "Verify Jaccard similarity with full body + comments"
  - label: "Stale only ({J} stale issues)"
    description: "Decide which stale issues to close vs. revive"
  - label: "Skip"
    description: "Stop here, audit only"

If "Skip" → end workflow.

Executing analysis

For each selected issue, launch an analysis agent via Task tool in parallel:

subagent_type: general
model: sonnet
prompt: |
  Analyze GitHub issue #{num}: "{title}"

  **Metadata**: Category={category}, Risk={risk}, Days open={days}, Labels={labels}
  **Reporter**: @{author} ({collaborator? "collaborator" : "external"})
  **Assignees**: {assignees or "none"}

  **Body**:
  {body}

  **Comments** (fetch via: gh issue view {num} --json comments):
  {comments[].body, truncate at 5000 chars total}

  **Duplicate candidates**: {jaccard_results or "none found"}
  **Linked PRs**: {pr_refs or "none"}

  Tasks:
  1. Verify the category assigned in Phase 1 (correct? suggest alternative if not)
  2. If duplicate candidate: confirm or deny similarity with rationale
  3. If Unclear/needs-info: identify exactly what information is missing
  4. Suggest the most appropriate action with exact text if a comment is needed
  5. Estimate effort to fix if it's a Bug or Feature Request (XS/S/M/L/XL)

  Return structured output:
  ### Verification
  ### Duplicate Analysis
  ### Missing Information
  ### Recommended Action
  ### Effort Estimate

Fallback if parallel agents unavailable: run analysis sequentially, one issue at a time. Notify user: Running sequential analysis (parallel agents not available).

Fetch full comments via:

gh issue view {num} --json comments --jq '.comments[].body'

Aggregate all reports. Display a summary after all analyses complete.


Phase 3: Actions (mandatory validation)

Draft generation

For each analyzed issue, generate the appropriate action using the template templates/issue-comment.md.

3 action types:

TypeCommandWhen
Commentgh issue comment {num} --body-file -Needs info, stale ping, OOS explanation
Labelgh issue edit {num} --add-label "{label}"Unlabeled issue with clear category
Closegh issue close {num} --reason "not planned"Duplicate, OOS, very stale

Rules:

  • Language for comments: English (international audience)
  • Labels added: use existing repo labels only (fetch with gh label list)
  • Close reason: "not planned" for OOS/duplicate, "completed" only if a fix was merged
  • Never post a comment AND close in the same action without user seeing both drafts
  • Always attach a comment when closing (explain why)

Display and validation

Display ALL drafted actions in format:

---
### Draft: Issue #{num}: {title}

**Action**: {Comment / Label / Close + Comment}
**Reason**: {1 sentence}

{full comment text if applicable}

---

Then request validation via AskUserQuestion:

question: "These actions are ready. Which ones do you want to execute?"
header: "Execute Triage Actions"
multiSelect: true
options:
  - label: "All ({N} actions)"
    description: "Execute all drafted triage actions"
  - label: "Issue #{x}: {title_truncated} ({action_type})"
    description: "Execute only this action"
  - label: "None"
    description: "Cancel, execute nothing"

(Generate one option per issue + "All" + "None")

Execution

For each validated action:

# Comment
gh issue comment {num} --body-file - <<'TRIAGE_EOF'
{comment}
TRIAGE_EOF

# Label
gh issue edit {num} --add-label "{label}"

# Close with comment
gh issue comment {num} --body-file - <<'TRIAGE_EOF'
{close comment}
TRIAGE_EOF
gh issue close {num} --reason "not planned"

Confirm each action: Action executed on issue #{num}: {title}

If "None" → No actions executed. Workflow complete.


Edge cases

SituationBehavior
0 open issuesDisplay No open issues. + stop
Body emptyCategory = Unclear, action = request details, never assume
Collaborator as reporterProtect from auto-close, flag explicitly in table
Jaccard inconclusive (0.55–0.65)Flag as "possible duplicate, verify manually"
Label not in repoSkip label action, notify user to create the label first
Issue already closed during workflowSkip silently, note in summary
gh api .../collaborators 403/404Fallback to last 10 merged PR authors
Parallel agents unavailableRun sequential analysis, notify user
Very large body (>5000 chars)Truncate to 5000 chars with [truncated] note
Milestone assignedInclude in table, never close milestoned issues without confirmation

Notes

  • Always derive owner/repo via gh repo view, never hardcode
  • Use gh CLI (not curl GitHub API) except for collaborators list
  • comments in gh issue list --json comments = count only; full content requires gh issue view {num} --json comments
  • Never execute any action without explicit user validation in chat
  • Drafted actions must be visible BEFORE any gh issue comment or gh issue close
  • Jaccard is computed locally: no external API, no library, pure set operations on fetched data
  • Signature on all comments: *Triaged via Claude Code /issue-triage*

Related: /pr-triage

/issue-triage/pr-triage
ScopeIssue backlogPR backlog
Use whenCatching up on reporter feedback, periodic issue cleanupCatching up after PR accumulation
Phases3 (audit + deep analysis + actions)3 (audit + deep review + comments)
AgentsParallel sub-agents per issueParallel sub-agents per PR
Duplicate detectionJaccard similarity on title+bodyFile overlap % between PRs
ActionsComment / label / closeGitHub review comment
ValidationAskUserQuestion before executingAskUserQuestion before posting

Decision rule: use /issue-triage for issue backlog management, /pr-triage for code review backlog.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Evaluate Claude Code agents, skills, and commands with weighted quality criteria. Get scores, readiness grades, template comparisons, and practical improvement suggestions in Markdown or JSON reports to guide reviews before release.

  • Review skills before release
  • Compare agent definitions with reference templates
  • Quickly check critical quality criteria
FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide6.2KUpdated Oct 18, 2026

audit-codebase

FreeSummary

Assess a codebase across seven areas, including exposed credentials, security, dependencies, structure, and tests. Receive category scores, findings tied to file locations, and a prioritized improvement plan with smaller tasks that can be completed quickly.

  • Assessing the overall health of an inherited project
  • Reviewing exposed credentials and security risks
  • Identifying dependency and test coverage gaps
FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide6.2KUpdated Oct 18, 2026

autoresearch

FreeSummary

Measure code patterns such as casts to any or disabled lint rules, then run repeated, targeted edits. Keep changes that improve the chosen metric, revert unsuccessful changes, and track results for each improvement loop.

  • Finding code patterns to prioritize for cleanup
  • Preparing measurement files for an improvement loop
  • Repeating targeted edits to reduce casts to any
FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide6.2KUpdated Oct 18, 2026

best-of-n

FreeSummary

Generate several separate solutions, compare them against criteria fixed in advance, and verify the selected result through executable checks or an independent reviewer. Keep a proof log documenting candidates, evidence, failures, and remaining limits.

  • Comparing implementation options before choosing one
  • Verifying a solution when a wrong choice would be costly
  • Keeping evaluation evidence for delivery or audit
FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide6.2KUpdated Oct 18, 2026

canary

FreeSummary

Monitor a live application after deployment and compare it with a saved baseline, a record of its earlier state. Check page responses, loading times, and new errors, flag persistent changes, and produce a per-page health report.

  • Recording a healthy baseline before deployment
  • Monitoring production immediately after deployment
  • Checking key pages for slower responses or failures
FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide6.2KUpdated Oct 18, 2026

catchup

FreeSummary

Rebuild project context after clearing a conversation or returning to work. Review recent Git history, uncommitted changes, and TODO markers to get a structured summary of project status and suggested next steps.

  • Restoring project context after /clear
  • Reviewing recent changes after a long break
  • Checking unfinished work before choosing the next task
FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide6.2KUpdated Oct 18, 2026

See all skills by FlorianBruniaux

Report a problem with this skill