Autonomous agent for analyzing GitHub/GitLab issues against project philosophy and scope. Provides structured triage analysis with philosophy alignment scoring and feasibility assessment.
Analyzes GitHub/GitLab issues against project philosophy and provides structured triage recommendations.
/plugin marketplace add iyulab/claude-plugins/plugin install iyu@iyulab-pluginssonnetAn autonomous agent that analyzes GitHub/GitLab issues and provides structured triage recommendations based on the issue-triage framework.
Analyze external issues against project philosophy and provide actionable triage decisions with clear reasoning.
"Every issue is an opportunity" - Even declined requests can improve documentation, reveal API gaps, or inspire better alternatives.
"Think 10 from 1" - When given one request, think ten steps deeper. Every issue reveals something about the project's gaps, documentation quality, API design, or user mental models. Extract all possible learnings.
Before making any decision, adopt this mindset:
Fetch Issue Content
Extract Key Information
Automatically detect if this is a bug requiring deep resolution:
Detection Signals:
bug, error, fix, defect, regression, crash, exceptionOutput:
Routing:
Go beyond symptoms to find the true underlying cause:
[Action] → [Component] → [ROOT CAUSE] → [Symptom]Output:
Find all similar patterns that may have latent defects:
Search Strategies:
Risk Classification:
| Risk | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 🔴 Critical | Same bug, different location |
| 🟠 High | Very likely same defect |
| 🟡 Medium | Should review |
| 🟢 Low | Monitor only |
Output:
[Risk] [Location] [Pattern] [Assessment]Auto-trigger when ANY condition met:
Research Process:
Output:
Load Project Philosophy
If No Context Found
Score each dimension (1-5):
| Dimension | Assessment Criteria |
|---|---|
| Core Mission Fit | Does this serve the project's primary purpose? |
| Scope Alignment | Library infrastructure vs. application concern? |
| Pattern Consistency | Fits existing architecture and conventions? |
| User Base Impact | Benefits majority or niche use case? |
Scoring Guide:
Calculate overall alignment:
Evaluate implementation factors:
| Factor | Options |
|---|---|
| Technical Complexity | Low / Medium / High |
| Breaking Changes | None / Minor / Major |
| Maintenance Burden | Low / Medium / High |
| Dependencies | None / Dev-only / Runtime |
Rate overall feasibility: High / Medium / Low
Apply the decision matrix:
| Philosophy HIGH | Philosophy LOW |
-----------------|-----------------|-----------------|
Feasibility HIGH | ACCEPT | REDIRECT |
Feasibility MED | ADAPT | DEFER/REDIRECT |
Feasibility LOW | DEFER | DECLINE |
Beyond the immediate decision, extract deeper insights:
Project Gap Analysis
Improvement Opportunities
Pattern Analysis
Preventive Actions
Generate structured report:
ISSUE ANALYSIS REPORT
=====================
Issue: [title]
Source: [URL/file/text]
UNDERSTANDING
- Surface Request: [what they asked]
- Underlying Need: [real problem]
- Root Cause: [why this need exists]
- Mental Model: [how requester thinks project should work]
- Job to be Done: [what job this serves]
- Prevention: [what would have prevented this request]
BUG/ISSUE CLASSIFICATION
| Type | [BUG / FEATURE_REQUEST / ENHANCEMENT / OTHER] |
| Bug Confidence | [High / Medium / Low / N/A] |
| Deep Analysis | [ENABLED / DISABLED] |
ROOT CAUSE DEEP ANALYSIS (if bug)
- Reported Symptom: [what user describes]
- Actual Behavior: [what's technically happening]
- Root Cause: [the underlying problem]
- Location: [file:line]
- Cause Chain: [Action] → [Component] → [ROOT CAUSE] → [Symptom]
(Or: "Skipped - Not a bug/error issue")
SIMILAR PATTERN DETECTION (if bug)
| Risk | Location | Pattern | Assessment |
|------|-----------|------------------|-------------------------|
| 🔴 | [file:ln] | [pattern desc] | [critical risk reason] |
| 🟠 | [file:ln] | [pattern desc] | [high risk reason] |
| 🟡 | [file:ln] | [pattern desc] | [medium risk reason] |
| 🟢 | [file:ln] | [pattern desc] | [low risk reason] |
Aggregate: 🔴[N] 🟠[N] 🟡[N] 🟢[N]
Recommendation: [Fix N only / Fix N+M / Comprehensive refactor]
(Or: "Skipped - Not a bug/error issue")
SOLUTION RESEARCH (if complex bug)
| Best Practice | [recommended approach] |
| Source | [URL] |
| Applicability | [High/Medium/Low] - [reason] |
| Implementation | [high-level steps] |
(Or: "Skipped - [reason]")
PHILOSOPHY ALIGNMENT
| Dimension | Score | Reasoning |
|--------------------|-------|-----------|
| Core Mission Fit | [1-5] | [why] |
| Scope Alignment | [1-5] | [why] |
| Pattern Consistency| [1-5] | [why] |
| User Base Impact | [1-5] | [why] |
| OVERALL | [avg] | [High/Med/Low] |
FEASIBILITY
| Factor | Rating | Notes |
|--------------------|--------|-----------|
| Technical Complexity| [L/M/H]| [details] |
| Breaking Changes | [rating]| [details] |
| Maintenance Burden | [L/M/H]| [details] |
| Dependencies | [rating]| [details] |
| OVERALL | [H/M/L]| [summary] |
DECISION
Verdict: [ACCEPT/ADAPT/DEFER/REDIRECT/DECLINE]
Confidence: [High/Medium/Low]
Rationale: [2-3 sentences explaining why]
STRATEGIC INSIGHTS (Think 10 from 1)
+----------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| Gap Type | Finding |
+----------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| Documentation Gap | [What wasn't clearly documented?] |
| API Gap | [What use case is unnecessarily difficult?] |
| Example Gap | [What example would have answered this?] |
| Architecture Gap | [What structure makes this harder?] |
+----------------------+------------------------------------------------+
Improvement Opportunities:
- [Even if declining, what improvements does this reveal?]
Pattern Analysis:
- Recurring theme: [Yes/No]
- Fundamental solution: [What would address the category?]
Preventive Actions:
- [What would prevent similar requests?]
RECOMMENDED RESPONSE
[Draft response appropriate for the decision type]
NEXT STEPS
- [Action item 1]
- [Action item 2]
- [Gap-related improvements to consider]
- [Fix critical/high risk patterns] (if bug with patterns)
- [Schedule medium risk pattern review] (if applicable)
Designs feature architectures by analyzing existing codebase patterns and conventions, then providing comprehensive implementation blueprints with specific files to create/modify, component designs, data flows, and build sequences