" --body "<body>" --label "<label1>,<label2>" # View issues by label gh issue list --label "component:CitationValidator" # Edit labels gh issue edit <number> --add-label "priority:high" gh issue edit <number> --remove-label "priority:low" ``` ## Red Flags - STOP If you catch yourself doing any of these, STOP and re-read this skill: - Creating issue without checking label format first - Using component name without `component:` prefix - Using `critical` instead of `priority:high` - Using lowercase component names (`markdown-parser` vs `MarkdownParser`) - Skipping priority label "because it's obvious" - Accepting vague titles from authority pressure ## Authority Override Response When someone suggests skipping labels or using vague titles: 1. Politely clarify scope: "What component? What's the actual problem?" 2. Create properly formatted issue anyway 3. Takes 30 seconds, saves hours of confusion later Bad issues multiply work. 2 minutes of clarity saves hours of "what did we mean?"

# github-managing-issues-skills > Use when creating, viewing, or labeling GitHub issues - enforces project label conventions (component:Name, priority:level, type:category) and proper title format before any issue creation - Author: Wesley Frederick - Repository: WesleyMFrederick/cc-workflows - Version: 20260129072413 - Stars: 1 - Forks: 0 - Last Updated: 2026-02-06 - Source: https://github.com/WesleyMFrederick/cc-workflows - Web: https://mule.run/skillshub/@@WesleyMFrederick/cc-workflows~github-managing-issues-skills:20260129072413 --- --- name: github-managing-issues-skills description: Use when creating, viewing, or labeling GitHub issues - enforces project label conventions (component:Name, priority:level, type:category) and proper title format before any issue creation --- # Managing GitHub Issues ## Critical Rule **ALWAYS read this skill BEFORE creating any issue.** Do not guess at label formats. ## Label Conventions (Exact Formats) | Category | Format | Examples | |----------|--------|----------| | Component | `component:` | `component:CitationValidator`, `component:MarkdownParser` | | Feature | `feature: ` | `feature: citation-manager` | | Priority | `priority:` | `priority:low`, `priority:medium`, `priority:high` | | Type | `type:` | `type:architecture`, `type:performance` | | Standard | lowercase | `bug`, `enhancement`, `tech-debt`, `documentation` | **Common mistakes:** - ❌ `CitationValidator` → ✅ `component:CitationValidator` - ❌ `critical` or `high` → ✅ `priority:high` - ❌ `component:markdown-parser` → ✅ `component:MarkdownParser` ## Title Format `(): ` - **Types:** bug, feat, refactor, docs, chore, perf - **Scope:** component name in lowercase Example: `bug(citation-validator): false positives on version numbers` ## Required Labels Checklist Before creating any issue, you MUST include: 1. ☐ Type label (`bug`, `enhancement`, `tech-debt`) 2. ☐ Component label if applicable (`component:Name`) 3. ☐ Priority label for actionable items (`priority:low/medium/high`) ## Multi-Component Issues When issue spans multiple components: 1. Apply ALL relevant component labels 2. Document root cause component in body 3. Prioritize by where fix should be made Example: Bug in MarkdownParser causing CitationValidator false positives: ```bash gh issue create \ --title "bug(markdown-parser): incorrect link extraction causes validator false positives" \ --label "bug,component:MarkdownParser,component:CitationValidator,priority:medium" ``` ## Linking to Repo Files Issue comments require **full blob paths**, not relative paths. **❌ Wrong (breaks in issue comments):** - Relative from repo root: `tools/path/file.md` - Relative path: `../design-docs/file.md` **✅ Correct format:** ```text /owner/repo/blob/main/path/to/file.md ``` **Example for this repo:** ```text /WesleyMFrederick/cc-workflows/blob/main/tools/citation-manager/README.md ``` **URL Encoding:** Spaces become `%20` (e.g., `Markdown%20Link%20Flavors.md`) **Why:** GitHub issue comments resolve paths relative to `/issues/`, not repo root. The blob path is absolute from GitHub's domain root. ## Command Reference ```bash # Create issue gh issue create --title "" --body "<body>" --label "<label1>,<label2>" # View issues by label gh issue list --label "component:CitationValidator" # Edit labels gh issue edit <number> --add-label "priority:high" gh issue edit <number> --remove-label "priority:low" ``` ## Red Flags - STOP If you catch yourself doing any of these, STOP and re-read this skill: - Creating issue without checking label format first - Using component name without `component:` prefix - Using `critical` instead of `priority:high` - Using lowercase component names (`markdown-parser` vs `MarkdownParser`) - Skipping priority label "because it's obvious" - Accepting vague titles from authority pressure ## Authority Override Response When someone suggests skipping labels or using vague titles: 1. Politely clarify scope: "What component? What's the actual problem?" 2. Create properly formatted issue anyway 3. Takes 30 seconds, saves hours of confusion later Bad issues multiply work. 2 minutes of clarity saves hours of "what did we mean?"