github-triage▌
mattpocock/skills · updated Apr 27, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Triage GitHub issues through a label-based state machine for efficient issue management.
| name | github-triage |
| description | Triage GitHub issues through a label-based state machine. Use when user wants to create an issue, triage issues, review incoming bugs or feature requests, prepare issues for an AFK agent, or manage issue workflow. |
GitHub Issue Triage
Triage issues in the current repo using a label-based state machine. Infer the repo from git remote. Use gh for all GitHub operations.
AI Disclaimer
Every comment or issue posted to GitHub during triage must include the following disclaimer at the top of the comment body, before any other content:
> *This was generated by AI during triage.*
Reference docs
- AGENT-BRIEF.md — how to write durable agent briefs
- OUT-OF-SCOPE.md — how the
.out-of-scope/knowledge base works
Labels
| Label | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
bug | Category | Something is broken |
enhancement | Category | New feature or improvement |
needs-triage | State | Maintainer needs to evaluate this issue |
needs-info | State | Waiting on reporter for more information |
ready-for-agent | State | Fully specified, ready for AFK agent |
ready-for-human | State | Requires human implementation |
wontfix | State | Will not be actioned |
Every issue should have exactly one state label and one category label. If an issue has conflicting state labels (e.g. both needs-triage and ready-for-agent), flag the conflict and ask the maintainer which state is correct before doing anything else. Provide a recommendation.
State Machine
| Current State | Can transition to | Who triggers it | What happens |
|---|---|---|---|
unlabeled | needs-triage | Skill (on first look) | Issue needs maintainer evaluation. Skill applies label after presenting recommendation. |
unlabeled | ready-for-agent | Maintainer (via skill) | Issue is already well-specified and agent-suitable. Skill writes agent brief comment, applies label. |
unlabeled | ready-for-human | Maintainer (via skill) | Issue requires human implementation. Skill writes a brief comment summarizing the task, applies label. |
unlabeled | wontfix | Maintainer (via skill) | Issue is spam, duplicate, or out of scope. Skill closes with comment (and writes .out-of-scope/ for enhancements). |
needs-triage | needs-info | Maintainer (via skill) | Issue is underspecified. Skill posts triage notes capturing progress so far + questions for reporter. |
needs-triage | ready-for-agent | Maintainer (via skill) | Grilling session complete, agent-suitable. Skill writes agent brief comment, applies label. |
needs-triage | ready-for-human | Maintainer (via skill) | Grilling session complete, needs human. Skill writes a brief comment summarizing the task, applies label. |
needs-triage | wontfix | Maintainer (via skill) | Maintainer decides not to action. Skill closes with comment (and writes .out-of-scope/ for enhancements). |
needs-info | needs-triage | Skill (detects reply) | Reporter has replied. Skill surfaces to maintainer for re-evaluation. |
An issue can only move along these transitions. The maintainer can override any state directly (see Quick State Override below), but the skill should flag if the transition is unusual.
Invocation
The maintainer invokes /github-triage then describes what they want in natural language. The skill interprets the request and takes the appropriate action.
Example requests:
- "Show me anything that needs my attention"
- "Let's look at #42"
- "Move #42 to ready-for-agent"
- "What's ready for agents to pick up?"
- "Are there any unlabeled issues?"
Workflow: Show What Needs Attention
When the maintainer asks for an overview, query GitHub and present a summary grouped into three buckets:
- Unlabeled issues — new, no labels at all. These have never been triaged.
needs-triageissues — maintainer needs to evaluate or continue evaluating.needs-infoissues with new activity — the reporter has commented since the last triage notes comment. Check comment timestamps to determine this.
Display counts per group. Within each group, show issues oldest first (longest-waiting gets attention first). For each issue, show: number, title, age, and a one-line summary of the issue body.
Let the maintainer pick which issue to dive into.
Workflow: Triage a Specific Issue
Step 1: Gather context
Before presenting anything to the maintainer:
- Read the full issue: body, all comments, all labels, who reported it, when
- If there are prior triage notes comments (from previous sessions), parse them to understand what has already been established
- Explore the codebase to build context — understand the domain, relevant interfaces, and existing behavior related to the issue
- Read
.out-of-scope/*.mdfiles and check if this issue matches or is similar to a previously rejected concept
Step 2: Present a recommendation
Tell the maintainer:
- Category recommendation: bug or enhancement, with reasoning
- State recommendation: where this issue should go, with reasoning
- If it matches a prior out-of-scope rejection, surface that: "This is similar to
.out-of-scope/concept-name.md— we rejected this before because X. Do you still feel the same way?" - A brief summary of what you found in the codebase that's relevant
Then wait for the maintainer's direction. They may:
- Agree and ask you to apply labels → do it
- Want to flesh it out → start a /domain-model session
- Override with a different state → apply their choice
- Want to discuss → have a conversation
Step 3: Bug reproduction (bugs only)
If the issue is categorized as a bug, attempt to reproduce it before starting a /domain-model session. This will vary by codebase, but do your best:
- Read the reporter's reproduction steps (if provided)
- Explore the codebase to understand the relevant code paths
- Try to reproduce the bug: run tests, execute commands, or trace the logic to confirm the reported behavior
- If reproduction succeeds, report what you found to the maintainer — include the specific behavior you observed and where in the code it originates
- If reproduction fails, report that too — the bug may be environment-specific, already fixed, or the report may be inaccurate
- If the report lacks enough detail to attempt reproduction, note that — this is a strong signal the issue should move to
needs-info
The reproduction attempt informs the /domain-model session and the agent brief. A confirmed reproduction with a known code path makes for a much stronger brief.
Step 4: /domain-model session (if needed)
If the issue needs to be fleshed out before it's ready for an agent, interview the maintainer to build a complete specification. Use the /domain-model skill.
Step 5: Apply the outcome
Depending on the outcome:
- ready-for-agent — post an agent brief comment (see AGENT-BRIEF.md)
- ready-for-human — post a comment summarizing the task, what was established during triage, and why it needs human implementation. Use the same structure as an agent brief but note the reason it can't be delegated to an agent (e.g. requires judgment calls, external system access, design decisions, or manual testing).
- needs-info — post triage notes with progress so far and questions for the reporter (see Needs Info Output below)
- wontfix (bug) — post a polite comment explaining why, then close the issue
- wontfix (enhancement) — write to
.out-of-scope/, post a comment linking to it, then close the issue (see OUT-OF-SCOPE.md) - needs-triage — apply the label. Optionally leave a comment if there's partial progress to capture.
Workflow: Quick State Override
When the maintainer explicitly tells you to move an issue to a specific state (e.g. "move #42 to ready-for-agent"), trust their judgment and apply the label directly.
Still show a confirmation of what you're about to do: which labels will be added/removed, and whether you'll post a comment or close the issue. But skip the /domain-model session entirely.
If moving to ready-for-agent without a /domain-model session, ask the maintainer if they want to write a brief agent brief comment or skip it.
Needs Info Output
When moving an issue to needs-info, post a comment that captures the interview progress and tells the reporter what's needed:
## Triage Notes
**What we've established so far:**
- point 1
- point 2
**What we still need from you (@reporter):**
- question 1
- question 2
Include everything resolved during the /domain-model session in "established so far" — this work should not be lost. The questions for the reporter should be specific and actionable, not vague ("please provide more info").
Resuming Previous Sessions
When triaging an issue that already has triage notes from a previous session:
- Read all comments to find prior triage notes
- Parse what was already established
- Check if the reporter has answered any outstanding questions
- Present the maintainer with an updated picture: "Here's where we left off, and here's what the reporter has said since"
- Continue the /domain-model session from where it stopped — do not re-ask resolved questions
How to use github-triage on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add github-triage
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches github-triage from GitHub repository mattpocock/skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate github-triage. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /github-triage) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path▌
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.6★★★★★27 reviews- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Dec 20, 2024
github-triage reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Ren Yang· Dec 20, 2024
We added github-triage from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Ishan Abbas· Dec 4, 2024
Useful defaults in github-triage — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Amelia Abbas· Nov 23, 2024
Registry listing for github-triage matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Piyush G· Nov 11, 2024
I recommend github-triage for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Meera Rahman· Nov 11, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: github-triage is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Daniel Garcia· Oct 14, 2024
github-triage reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Oct 2, 2024
Useful defaults in github-triage — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Kwame Martin· Oct 2, 2024
github-triage has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Henry Thomas· Sep 9, 2024
Useful defaults in github-triage — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
showing 1-10 of 27