create-release-note

Create Release Note

This skill provides detailed step-by-step implementation guidance for the /jira:create-release-note command, which automatically generates bug fix release notes by analyzing Jira bug tickets and their linked GitHub pull requests.

When to Use This Skill

This skill is automatically invoked by the /jira:create-release-note command and should not be called directly by users.

Prerequisites

• MCP Jira server configured and accessible
• GitHub CLI (gh) installed and authenticated
• User has read access to the Jira bug
• User has write access to Release Note fields in Jira
• User has read access to linked GitHub repositories

Implementation Steps

Step 1: Fetch and Validate Jira Bug

Objective: Retrieve the bug ticket and validate it's appropriate for release note generation.

Actions:

1. Fetch the bug via getJiraIssue with the issue key and responseContentFormat: "markdown".

2. Parse the response:

   • Extract issuetype.name - verify it's "Bug"
   • Extract description - full bug description text
   • Extract issuelinks - array of linked issues
   • Extract customfield_10785 - current Release Note Type (if already set)
   • Extract customfield_10783 - current Release Note Text (if already set)
   • Extract comment.comments - array of comment objects

3. Validate issue type:

   • If issuetype.name != "Bug", show warning:

     Warning: {issue-key} is not a Bug (it's a {issuetype.name}).
     Release notes are typically for bugs. Continue anyway? (yes/no)
     

   • If user says no, exit without making changes

4. Check if release note already exists:

   • If customfield_10783 is not empty, show warning:

     This bug already has a release note:
     ---
     {existing release note}
     ---
     
     Do you want to regenerate it? (yes/no)
     

   • If user says no, exit without making changes

Step 2: Parse Bug Description for Cause and Consequence

Objective: Extract the required Cause and Consequence sections from the bug description.

Bug Description Format:

Jira bug descriptions often follow this structure:

Description of problem:
{code:none}
<problem description>
{code}

Cause:
{code:none}
<root cause>
{code}

Consequence:
{code:none}
<impact>
{code}

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
...

How reproducible:
...

Steps to Reproduce:
...

Actual results:
...

Expected results:
...

Parsing Strategy:

1. Look for "Cause:" section:

   • Search for the string "Cause:" (case-insensitive)
   • Extract text between "Cause:" and the next major section
   • Remove Jira markup: {code:none}, {code}, etc.
   • Trim whitespace

2. Look for "Consequence:" section:

   • Search for the string "Consequence:" (case-insensitive)
   • Extract text between "Consequence:" and the next major section
   • Remove Jira markup
   • Trim whitespace

3. Alternative patterns:

   • Some bugs may use "Root Cause:" instead of "Cause:"
   • Some bugs may use "Impact:" instead of "Consequence:"
   • Try variations if exact match not found

4. Handle missing sections:

   • If Cause is missing:

     Bug description is missing the "Cause" section.
     
     Would you like to:
     1. Provide the Cause interactively
     2. Update the bug description in Jira first
     3. Cancel
     

   • If Consequence is missing:

     Bug description is missing the "Consequence" section.
     
     Would you like to:
     1. Provide the Consequence interactively
     2. Update the bug description in Jira first
     3. Cancel
     

5. Interactive input (if user chooses option 1):

   • Prompt: "What is the root cause of this bug?"
   • Collect user input
   • Use as Cause value
   • Repeat for Consequence if needed

Example Parsing:

Input:

Description of problem:
{code:none}
The control plane operator crashes when CloudProviderConfig.Subnet is not specified
{code}

Cause:
{code:none}
hostedcontrolplane controller crashes when hcp.Spec.Platform.AWS.CloudProviderConfig.Subnet.ID is undefined
{code}

Consequence:
{code:none}
control-plane-operator enters a crash loop
{code}

Output:

Cause: "hostedcontrolplane controller crashes when hcp.Spec.Platform.AWS.CloudProviderConfig.Subnet.ID is undefined"
Consequence: "control-plane-operator enters a crash loop"

Step 3: Extract Linked GitHub PRs

Objective: Find all GitHub PR URLs associated with this bug.

Sources to check (in priority order):

1. Remote Links (Primary source - web links in Jira):

   • Check the Jira issue response for web links
   • Field name varies: remotelinks, or issuelinks with outward GitHub PR links
   • Extract GitHub PR URLs matching pattern: https://github\.com/[\w-]+/[\w-]+/pull/\d+
   • IMPORTANT: Never use gh issue view {JIRA-KEY} - Jira keys are NOT GitHub issue numbers

2. Bug Description:

   • Scan the description field for GitHub PR URLs
   • Use regex: https://github\.com/([\w-]+)/([\w-]+)/pull/(\d+)
   • Extract and parse all matches
   • IMPORTANT: Only extract full PR URLs, not issue references

3. Bug Comments:

   • Iterate through comment.comments array
   • For each comment, scan body field for GitHub PR URLs
   • Use same regex pattern
   • Extract all matches

4. Search by bug number (Fallback if no PR URLs found):

   • If no PRs found via links, search GitHub for PRs mentioning the bug
   • For OCPBUGS: Try common OpenShift repos:

     for repo in "openshift/hypershift" "openshift/cluster-api-provider-aws" "openshift/origin"; do
       gh pr list --repo "$repo" --search "{issue-key} in:title,body" --state all --limit 10 --json number,url,title
     done
     

   • Display found PRs and ask user to confirm which are relevant:

     Found PRs mentioning {issue-key}:
     1. openshift/hypershift#4567 - Fix panic when CloudProviderConfig.Subnet is undefined
     2. openshift/hypershift#4568 - Add tests for Subnet validation
     
     Which PRs should be included in the release note? (enter numbers separated by commas, or 'all')
     

   • IMPORTANT: Never use gh issue view {JIRA-KEY} - this will fail

URL Parsing:

For each found URL https://github.com/openshift/hypershift/pull/4567:

• Extract org: "openshift"
• Extract repo: "hypershift"
• Extract pr_number: "4567"
• Store as: {"url": "...", "repo": "openshift/hypershift", "number": "4567"}

Deduplication:

• Keep only unique PR URLs
• If same PR is mentioned multiple times, include it only once

Validation:

• If no PRs found after all attempts:

  No GitHub PRs found linked to {issue-key}.
  
  Please link at least one PR to generate release notes.
  
  How to link PRs in Jira:
  1. Edit the bug in Jira
  2. Add a web link to the GitHub PR URL
  3. Or mention the PR URL in a comment
  4. Then run this command again
  

  Exit without updating the ticket.

Example:

Found PRs:

[
  {
    "url": "https://github.com/openshift/hypershift/pull/4567",
    "repo": "openshift/hypershift",
    "number": "4567"
  },
  {
    "url": "https://github.com/openshift/hypershift/pull/4568",
    "repo": "openshift/hypershift",
    "number": "4568"
  }
]

Step 4: Analyze Each GitHub PR

Objective: Extract Fix, Result, and Workaround information from each linked PR.

For each PR in the list:

4.1: Fetch PR Details

Command:

gh pr view {number} --json body,title,commits,url,state --repo {repo}

Error handling:

if ! gh pr view {number} --json body,title,commits,url,state --repo {repo} 2>/dev/null; then
  echo "Warning: Unable to access PR {url}"
  echo "Verify the PR exists and you have permissions."
  # Skip this PR, continue with next
fi

Expected output (JSON):

{
  "body": "This PR fixes the panic when CloudProviderConfig.Subnet is not specified...",
  "title": "Fix panic when CloudProviderConfig.Subnet is not specified",
  "commits": [
    {
      "messageHeadline": "Add nil check for Subnet field",
      "messageBody": "This prevents the controller from crashing..."
    }
  ],
  "url": "https://github.com/openshift/hypershift/pull/4567",
  "state": "MERGED"
}

Parse and store:

• title: PR title (short summary)
• body: Full PR description
• commits: Array of commit objects with messages
• state: PR state (MERGED, OPEN, CLOSED)

4.2: Fetch PR Diff

Command:

gh pr diff {number} --repo {repo}

Purpose: Understand what code was actually changed

Analysis strategy:

• Look for added lines (starting with +)
• Identify key changes:
  • New error handling (if err != nil)
  • New validation checks (if x == nil)
  • New return statements
  • New error messages
• Don't include the entire diff in the release note
• Summarize the nature of changes

Example diff analysis:

+if hcp.Spec.Platform.AWS.CloudProviderConfig.Subnet == nil {
+    return fmt.Errorf("Subnet configuration is required")
+}

Summary: "Added nil check for CloudProviderConfig.Subnet field"

4.3: Fetch PR Comments

Command:

gh pr view {number} --json comments --repo {repo}

Expected output (JSON):

{
  "comments": [
    {
      "author": {"login": "reviewer1"},
      "body": "This looks good. The nil check will prevent the crash."
    },
    {
      "author": {"login": "author"},
      "body": "Yes, and I also added a more descriptive error message."
    }
  ]
}

Analysis strategy:

• Look for mentions of:
  • "workaround"
  • "temporary fix"
  • "until this is merged"
  • "users can work around this by..."
• Extract workaround information if found
• Look for clarifications about the fix
• Ignore unrelated discussion

4.4: Synthesize PR Analysis

Combine all sources (title, body, commits, diff, comments) to extract:

Fix (what was changed):

• Prefer: PR body description of the fix
• Fallback: PR title + commit message summaries
• Focus on: What code/configuration was modified
• Keep concise: 1-3 sentences
• Avoid: Implementation details (specific function names, line numbers)

Example Fix:

Added nil check for CloudProviderConfig.Subnet before accessing Subnet.ID field to prevent nil pointer dereference

Result (outcome after the fix):

• Prefer: PR body description of expected behavior
• Fallback: Inverse of the bug's "Actual results"
• Focus on: What changed for users
• Keep concise: 1-2 sentences

Example Result:

The control-plane-operator no longer crashes when CloudProviderConfig.Subnet is not specified

Workaround (temporary solution before fix):

• Only include if explicitly mentioned in PR or comments
• Look for keywords: "workaround", "temporary", "manually"
• If not found: Omit this section entirely

Example Workaround (if found):

Users can manually specify a Subnet value in the HostedCluster spec to avoid the crash

Step 5: Combine Multiple PRs

Objective: If multiple PRs are linked, synthesize them into a single coherent release note.

Scenarios:

Scenario A: Multiple PRs with different fixes

Example:

• PR #123: Fixes nil pointer crash
• PR #456: Adds better error message
• PR #789: Adds validation tests

Strategy: Combine all fixes into a narrative

Fix: Added nil check for CloudProviderConfig.Subnet field (PR #123), improved error messaging for missing configuration (PR #456), and added validation tests to prevent regression (PR #789)

Scenario B: Multiple PRs for same fix (backports)

Example:

• PR #123: Fix for main branch
• PR #456: Backport to release-4.20
• PR #789: Backport to release-4.19

Strategy: Mention the fix once, note the backports

Fix: Added nil check for CloudProviderConfig.Subnet field (backported to 4.20 and 4.19)

Scenario C: Multiple PRs with conflicting descriptions

Example:

• PR #123 says: "Fixed by adding validation"
• PR #456 says: "Fixed by removing the field access"

Strategy: Analyze the code diffs to determine what actually happened, or ask user:

Found multiple PRs with different fix descriptions:
- PR #123: "Fixed by adding validation"
- PR #456: "Fixed by removing the field access"

Which description is more accurate, or should I combine them?

Step 6: Format Release Note

Objective: Create the final release note text following the standard template.

Template:

Cause: {cause from Jira}
Consequence: {consequence from Jira}
Fix: {synthesized from PRs}
Result: {synthesized from PRs}
Workaround: {synthesized from PRs - optional}

Formatting rules:

• Each line starts with the field name followed by a colon and space
• No blank lines between fields
• Workaround field is optional - omit if no workaround exists
• Keep each field concise but complete
• Use proper capitalization and punctuation

Example output:

Cause: hostedcontrolplane controller crashes when hcp.Spec.Platform.AWS.CloudProviderConfig.Subnet.ID is undefined
Consequence: control-plane-operator enters a crash loop
Fix: Added nil check for CloudProviderConfig.Subnet before accessing Subnet.ID field
Result: The control-plane-operator no longer crashes when CloudProviderConfig.Subnet is not specified

Step 7: Security Validation

Objective: Scan the release note text for sensitive data before submission.

Patterns to detect:

1. API Tokens and Keys:

   • Pattern: (sk|pk)_[a-zA-Z0-9]{20,}
   • Pattern: ghp_[a-zA-Z0-9]{36}
   • Pattern: gho_[a-zA-Z0-9]{36}
   • Pattern: github_pat_[a-zA-Z0-9]{22}_[a-zA-Z0-9]{59}

2. AWS Credentials:

   • Pattern: AKIA[0-9A-Z]{16}
   • Pattern: aws_access_key_id\s*=\s*[A-Z0-9]+
   • Pattern: aws_secret_access_key\s*=\s*[A-Za-z0-9/+=]+

3. Passwords in URLs:

   • Pattern: https?://[^:]+:[^@]+@
   • Example: https://user:[email protected]

4. JWT Tokens:

   • Pattern: eyJ[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+\.eyJ[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+\.[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+

5. SSH Private Keys:

   • Pattern: -----BEGIN (RSA|OPENSSH|DSA|EC|PGP) PRIVATE KEY-----

6. Kubernetes Secrets:

   • Pattern: [a-zA-Z0-9+/]{40,}==? (base64 encoded secrets)
   • Context: If appears after "token:", "secret:", "password:"

Validation logic:

sensitive_patterns = {
    "API Token": r"(sk|pk)_[a-zA-Z0-9]{20,}",
    "GitHub Token": r"gh[po]_[a-zA-Z0-9]{36}",
    "AWS Access Key": r"AKIA[0-9A-Z]{16}",
    "URL with credentials": r"https?://[^:]+:[^@]+@",
    "JWT Token": r"eyJ[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+\.eyJ[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+",
    "Private Key": r"-----BEGIN .* PRIVATE KEY-----"
}

for name, pattern in sensitive_patterns.items():
    if re.search(pattern, release_note_text):
        print(f"Security validation failed!")
        print(f"Detected what appears to be {name} in the release note text.")
        print(f"Please review the source PRs and remove any credentials.")
        exit(1)

If validation fails:

Security validation failed!

Detected what appears to be an API token in the release note text.

This may have come from:
- PR description
- Commit messages
- Code changes (diff)
- PR comments

Please review the source PRs and remove any credentials before proceeding.

Use placeholder values instead:
- YOUR_API_KEY
- <redacted>
- ********

Aborting release note creation.

Step 8: Select Release Note Type

Objective: Determine the appropriate Release Note Type for this bug.

Available types (from Jira dropdown):

1. Bug Fix
2. Release Note Not Required
3. Known Issue
4. Enhancement
5. Rebase
6. Technology Preview
7. Deprecated Functionality
8. CVE

Auto-detection strategy:

1. For OCPBUGS: Default suggestion is "Bug Fix" (most common)

2. Check for CVE references:

   • If bug description or PRs mention "CVE-" → Suggest "CVE"

3. Check for deprecation:

   • If PRs mention "deprecated", "deprecating", "removing" → Suggest "Deprecated Functionality"

4. Check for new features:

   • If PRs add significant new functionality → Suggest "Enhancement"
   • Though typically bugs should be "Bug Fix"

5. Check for known issues:

   • If PRs don't actually fix the issue, just document it → Suggest "Known Issue"

User interaction:

Use the AskUserQuestion tool:

questions = [{
  "question": "What type of release note is this?",
  "header": "Type",
  "multiSelect": false,
  "options": [
    {
      "label": "Bug Fix",
      "description": "Fix for a defect (most common)"
    },
    {
      "label": "Known Issue",
      "description": "Documents a known problem without a fix"
    },
    {
      "label": "Enhancement",
      "description": "New feature or improvement"
    },
    {
      "label": "CVE",
      "description": "Security vulnerability fix"
    }
  ]
}]

Store selection for use in the next step.

Step 9: Update Jira Ticket

Objective: Write the release note to the Jira ticket.

Use editJiraIssue with the issue key, contentFormat: "markdown", and set the following fields:

• customfield_10785 (Release Note Type): {"value": "<selected_type>"}
• customfield_10783 (Release Note Text): the formatted release note text

Field details:

• customfield_10785: Release Note Type (must be exact match from dropdown)
• customfield_10783: Release Note Text (plain text)

Error handling:

1. Permission denied:

   Failed to update {issue-key}.
   
   Error: You do not have permission to edit Release Note fields
   
   Please contact your Jira administrator or manually add the release note.
   
   Generated release note (for manual entry):
   ---
   {release_note_text}
   ---
   

2. Invalid field value:

   Failed to update Release Note Type field.
   
   Error: Value "{selected_type}" is not valid
   
   Please select a different type or manually update in Jira.
   

3. Field not found:

   Failed to update {issue-key}.
   
   Error: Field customfield_10785 not found
   
   This may indicate a different Jira instance or configuration.
   Please manually add the release note.
   

Success response:

{
  "success": true,
  "issue": {
    "key": "OCPBUGS-38358",
    "fields": {
      "customfield_10785": {"value": "Bug Fix"},
      "customfield_10783": "Cause: ... Consequence: ... Fix: ... Result: ..."
    }
  }
}

Step 10: Display Results

Objective: Show the user what was created and provide next steps.

Output format:

✓ Release Note Created for {issue-key}

Type: {Release Note Type}

Text:
---
{Release Note Text with proper formatting}
---

Updated: https://redhat.atlassian.net/browse/{issue-key}

Next steps:
- Review the release note in Jira
- Edit manually if any adjustments are needed
- The release note will be included in the next release

Example:

✓ Release Note Created for OCPBUGS-38358

Type: Bug Fix

Text:
---
Cause: hostedcontrolplane controller crashes when hcp.Spec.Platform.AWS.CloudProviderConfig.Subnet.ID is undefined
Consequence: control-plane-operator enters a crash loop
Fix: Added nil check for CloudProviderConfig.Subnet before accessing Subnet.ID field
Result: The control-plane-operator no longer crashes when CloudProviderConfig.Subnet is not specified
---

Updated: https://redhat.atlassian.net/browse/OCPBUGS-38358

Next steps:
- Review the release note in Jira
- Edit manually if any adjustments are needed
- The release note will be included in the next release

Error Recovery Strategies

PR Analysis Failures

Problem: Some PRs can't be accessed or analyzed

Recovery:

1. Log warning for each failed PR
2. Continue with successfully analyzed PRs
3. If all PRs fail, treat as "No PRs linked" error
4. Show summary of what was analyzed:

   Analyzed 2 of 3 linked PRs:
   ✓ PR #123
   ✓ PR #456
   ✗ PR #789 (access denied)
   

Incomplete Bug Description

Problem: Missing Cause or Consequence sections

Recovery:

1. Offer interactive input option
2. Provide template for user
3. Allow user to update bug and retry
4. Don't proceed without both fields

Ambiguous PR Content

Problem: PRs don't clearly explain the fix

Recovery:

1. Use PR title as fallback
2. Analyze code diff more carefully
3. Ask user for clarification:

   The linked PR doesn't clearly describe the fix.
   
   Based on code analysis, it appears to:
   {best guess from diff}
   
   Is this correct? If not, please describe the fix:
   

Conflicting Information

Problem: Multiple PRs describe different fixes

Recovery:

1. Present both descriptions to user
2. Ask which is correct or how to combine
3. Use AI to attempt intelligent synthesis
4. If synthesis fails, escalate to user

Best Practices for Implementation

1. Always validate inputs: Check that issue exists, PRs are accessible, fields are present
2. On failure, provide helpful error messages with recovery instructions
3. Be defensive: Handle missing data, API errors, permission issues
4. Log progress: Show user what's happening at each step
5. Preserve data: If update fails, show generated content so it's not lost
6. Security first: Always validate before updating Jira
7. User in control: Confirm selections, allow overrides

Testing Checklist

• Bug with single linked PR
• Bug with multiple linked PRs
• Bug with no linked PRs (error case)
• Bug with inaccessible PR (warning case)
• Bug missing Cause section (error case)
• Bug missing Consequence section (error case)
• Bug with existing release note (warning case)
• Bug that's not a Bug type (warning case)
• Release note with detected credentials (security failure)
• Different Release Note Type selections
• Update permission denied (error case)
• MCP server not configured (error case)
• gh CLI not authenticated (error case)