agent operations skill risk: medium
Interactive QA GitHub Issue Filer
Run an interactive QA session where the user describes bugs or issues; clarify at most 2-3 questions, explore the codebase in the background via a subagent, decide whether to file…
- Policy sensitive
- Human review
- External action: high
SKILL 1 file
SKILL.md
--- name: qa description: "Interactive QA session where user reports bugs or issues conversationally, and the agent files GitHub issues. Explores the codebase in the background for context and domain language. Use when user wants to report bugs, do QA, file issues conversationally, or mentions \"QA session\"." --- # QA Session Run an interactive QA session. The user describes problems they're encountering. You clarify, explore the codebase for context, and file GitHub issues that are durable, user-focused, and use the project's domain language. ## For each issue the user raises ### 1. Listen and lightly clarify Let the user describe the problem in their own words. Ask **at most 2-3 short clarifying questions** focused on: - What they expected vs what actually happened - Steps to reproduce (if not obvious) - Whether it's consistent or intermittent Do NOT over-interview. If the description is clear enough to file, move on. ### 2. Explore the codebase in the background While talking to the user, kick off an Agent (subagent_type=Explore) in the background to understand the relevant area. The goal is NOT to find a fix — it's to: - Learn the domain language used in that area (check UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md) - Understand what the feature is supposed to do - Identify the user-facing behavior boundary This context helps you write a better issue — but the issue itself should NOT reference specific files, line numbers, or internal implementation details. ### 3. Assess scope: single issue or breakdown? Before filing, decide whether this is a **single issue** or needs to be **broken down** into multiple issues. Break down when: - The fix spans multiple independent areas (e.g. "the form validation is wrong AND the success message is missing AND the redirect is broken") - There are clearly separable concerns that different people could work on in parallel - The user describes something that has multiple distinct failure modes or symptoms Keep as a single issue when: - It's one behavior that's wrong in one place - The symptoms are all caused by the same root behavior ### 4. File the GitHub issue(s) Create issues with `gh issue create`. Do NOT ask the user to review first — just file and share URLs. Issues must be **durable** — they should still make sense after major refactors. Write from the user's perspective. #### For a single issue Use this template: ``` ## What happened [Describe the actual behavior the user experienced, in plain language] ## What I expected [Describe the expected behavior] ## Steps to reproduce 1. [Concrete, numbered steps a developer can follow] 2. [Use domain terms from the codebase, not internal module names] 3. [Include relevant inputs, flags, or configuration] ## Additional context [Any extra observations from the user or from codebase exploration that help frame the issue — e.g. "this only happens when using the Docker layer, not the filesystem layer" — use domain language but don't cite files] ``` #### For a breakdown (multiple issues) Create issues in dependency order (blockers first) so you can reference real issue numbers. Use this template for each sub-issue: ``` ## Parent issue #<parent-issue-number> (if you created a tracking issue) or "Reported during QA session" ## What's wrong [Describe this specific behavior problem — just this slice, not the whole report] ## What I expected [Expected behavior for this specific slice] ## Steps to reproduce 1. [Steps specific to THIS issue] ## Blocked by - #<issue-number> (if this issue can't be fixed until another is resolved) Or "None — can start immediately" if no blockers. ## Additional context [Any extra observations relevant to this slice] ``` When creating a breakdown: - **Prefer many thin issues over few thick ones** — each should be independently fixable and verifiable - **Mark blocking relationships honestly** — if issue B genuinely can't be tested until issue A is fixed, say so. If they're independent, mark both as "None — can start immediately" - **Create issues in dependency order** so you can reference real issue numbers in "Blocked by" - **Maximize parallelism** — the goal is that multiple people (or agents) can grab different issues simultaneously #### Rules for all issue bodies - **No file paths or line numbers** — these go stale - **Use the project's domain language** (check UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md if it exists) - **Describe behaviors, not code** — "the sync service fails to apply the patch" not "applyPatch() throws on line 42" - **Reproduction steps are mandatory** — if you can't determine them, ask the user - **Keep it concise** — a developer should be able to read the issue in 30 seconds After filing, print all issue URLs (with blocking relationships summarized) and ask: "Next issue, or are we done?" ### 5. Continue the session Keep going until the user says they're done. Each issue is independent — don't batch them.
REQUIRED CONTEXT
- user description of problems
- codebase for background exploration
OPTIONAL CONTEXT
- UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md
TOOLS REQUIRED
- gh
- subagent
ROLES & RULES
- Ask at most 2-3 short clarifying questions
- Do NOT over-interview
- Kick off an Agent (subagent_type=Explore) in the background
- Decide whether this is a single issue or needs to be broken down
- Do NOT ask the user to review first
- Use this template for a single issue
- Use this template for each sub-issue
- Prefer many thin issues over few thick ones
- Mark blocking relationships honestly
- Create issues in dependency order
- Maximize parallelism
- No file paths or line numbers
- Use the project's domain language
- Describe behaviors, not code
- Reproduction steps are mandatory
- Keep it concise
- Print all issue URLs and ask: "Next issue, or are we done?"
- Keep going until the user says they're done
EXPECTED OUTPUT
- Format
- chat_message
- Schema
- markdown_sections · What happened, What I expected, Steps to reproduce, Additional context, Parent issue, What's wrong, Blocked by
- Constraints
- use project domain language
- no file paths or line numbers
- reproduction steps mandatory
- keep concise
- print issue URLs after filing and ask to continue
SUCCESS CRITERIA
- File durable user-focused issues
- Use project's domain language
- Describe behaviors not code
- Include mandatory reproduction steps
- Keep issues concise
CAVEATS
- Missing context
- Target repository / GitHub authentication details
- Whether UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md is guaranteed to exist
- Ambiguities
- "lightly clarify" and "at most 2-3 short clarifying questions" are subjective in edge cases
- Does not specify how to invoke or configure the background Explore subagent
QUALITY
- OVERALL
- 0.85
- CLARITY
- 0.85
- SPECIFICITY
- 0.90
- REUSABILITY
- 0.80
- COMPLETENESS
- 0.88
IMPROVEMENT SUGGESTIONS
- Add a short "Prerequisites" section listing required tools (gh CLI, repo access) and environment assumptions
- Replace "kick off an Agent (subagent_type=Explore)" with a concrete, copy-pasteable command or function call pattern
USAGE
Copy the prompt above and paste it into your AI of choice — Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or anywhere else you're working. Replace any placeholder sections with your own context, then ask for the output.
MORE FOR AGENT
- Local Documentation Online Sync Automatoragentoperations
- HashiCorp Packer Golden Image Expertagentoperations
- ML Experiment GPU Deployment Workflowagentoperations
- Codex Training Metrics Monitoragentoperations
- Context Optimization Techniques Guideagentoperations
- Issue Triage State Machineagentoperations
- ML Experiment Results Monitoragentoperations
- DOCX Document Creation Editing Guideagentoperations
- Repo Agent Skills Configuration Setupagentoperations
- Git Worktree Isolated Workspace Setupagentoperations
- Agent Context Compression Strategiesagentoperations
- Parallel Agent Dispatcher for Independent Tasksagentoperations
- Scientific Computing Resource Detectoragentoperations
- PPTX File Handling Skill Guideagentoperations
- Sprint Retrospective Facilitatoragentoperations
- Agent Skill Writing Guideagentoperations
- Brilliant Directories Rube MCP Automation Guideagentoperations
- Istio Linkerd Service Mesh Expertagentoperations
- Machine Learning Experiment Monitoragentoperations
- Benchling Python SDK Integrationagentoperations
- Blackbaud Automation via Rube MCPagentoperations
- DigitalOcean Automation via Rube MCPagentoperations
- Service Mesh Architecture Expertagentoperations
- WandB Training Metrics Health Checkeragentoperations
- Bubble Automation via Rube MCPagentoperations