Skip to content
Agentmart
Submit a tool

file-issue

Draft and file a GitHub issue using gh-body-conventions and the issue body skeleton, via the gh-post wrapper.

Skill by ultimatile

IndexedMIT
Write a review

Chalk Labs

Need help deploying file-issue?

Chalk Labs sets up agents like this inside real teams: connected to your tools, tested on your data, with a human in the loop where it matters.

Book a call

Install

Works with Claude Code, Claude apps, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot, VS Code, OpenCode, Goose, Windsurf. Read the repository before you give any tool access to your data.

npx agentmarket install skill/ultimatile-file-issue

Asks which of your tools to add it to (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, VS Code, Windsurf, Gemini CLI, Claude Desktop) and shows the change first. See https://agentmart.dev/cli.

Get the weekly diff

The weekly diff: one email a week with new agent tools, notable updates and grade changes, plus security alerts for tools you follow. Double opt-in, one-click unsubscribe.

We use your email only for this newsletter. Privacy

About

Draft and file a GitHub issue using gh-body-conventions and the issue body skeleton, via the gh-post wrapper.

No reviews yet. Installed it? Reviews come from verified installers only. How reviews work

Permissions

What this skill can do and what it asks for, from its SKILL.md. Checked Oct 25, 2026.

Tools
No tools found
Secrets
None asked for
Install scripts
None found

Network hosts it talks to 1

  • codeload.github.com · found in install command

Files it touches

  • ~/.claude/skills/file-issue

What's inside

Skill name
file-issue
Description
Draft and file a GitHub issue using gh-body-conventions and the issue body skeleton, via the gh-post wrapper.
License
MIT
Instructions
110 lines in SKILL.md · view on GitHub

Files (1)

  • SKILL.md

SKILL.md (first lines)

# File Issue

Draft a GitHub issue body that follows the user's conventions, show the draft for approval, then file via `gh`.

## Conventions

Apply the rules in `gh-body-conventions` to the title and body. One issue-specific rule on top of them:

- **Omit empty sections.** If a heading's content would be empty (no bullets, no prose), drop the heading entirely. No `TBD` placeholders, no empty bullet lists, no synthesized filler.

### Length

A typical issue body is 5–25 lines. Longer is fine when warranted (e.g., a design proposal with alternatives), but every paragraph should earn its place. Aim for: problem statement, minimal reproduction or evidence, proposed direction (if any).

## Variants

### Umbrella sub-issue

When the new issue is a phase / sub-issue of an existing umbrella tracking issue, the body shape and title convention differ from a standalone issue.

- **First body line.** `Parent: #<umbrella#>`. Always included so tooling can detect the umbrella linkage.
- **Title.** `Phase N: <topic>` when the umbrella uses phase naming; otherwise mirror the umbrella's sub-task naming convention.
- **Body shape.** Goal / Scope / Out of scope / Acceptance (in place of the default problem-statement shape). When the leaf research has produced a full `research` plan, that plan IS the body — the sub-issue body is the canonical contract surface, not a thin pointer to a comment elsewhere.
- **"Out of scope" extraction.** When inheriting from an umbrella with a Phases table: list only **unspawned sibling phases later than the chosen one**, formatted as `<topic> (Phase <id>)`. The point is to pin scope-creep boundaries against work the umbrella has already promised to a future sub-issue. Do not copy umbrella-wide deferrals shared across all phases (e.g. "1-site DMRG", "opsum DSL"). Already-completed earlier phases are also not listed (the boundary is forward-looking).
- **Frozen-contract discipline.** The sub-issue body is written at file time and not edited during implementation. Drift discovered during implementation goes to the PR's `Plan-vs-actual delta` (and, when a reader genuinely needs it, a `Notes` caveat in the PR body framed as the code's own limitation), never back to the issue body. Editing the body rewrites history that PR titles, commit messages, and `Closes #N` references already point to.

After filing, append the new sub-issue's number to the umbrella's Phases table row. This is the only umbrella-body edit performed at sub-issue spawn time; deeper umbrella drift (decisions captured, out-of-scope changes) is handled later at sub-issue close, not at spawn.

## Procedure

### 1. Confirm scope

Before drafting, identify:

- Target repo (`gh repo view` if unclear).
- Whether this is a bug, feature, design discussion, or umbrella sub-issue. The default body shape covers the first three; umbrella sub-issues use the shape defined in `Variants > Umbrella sub-issue` above.
- Any related issues/PRs to link.
- **Premise type (rot exposure).** Is the premise an **absence** (a capability / perf / test not built yet) or **coupled to current code state** (a specific construct is wrong / missing a test / a stopgap with a known expiry)?
  - Absence → it stays valid until built.
  - Code-coupled → step 6 decides whether the issue takes the `perishable` label. If a known issue/refactor would obviate or reshape it, link that trigger in the body (or fold it in there as a checklist item).

### 2. Draft

Produce a title and body following the conventions above.

**Title** — a single descriptive line under ~70 characters. No leading type prefix unless the repo's existing issues use one.

**Body** — typical structure (adapt as needed):

```
<one-paragraph problem statement using semantic line breaks>

## Context  (optional — only if the reader needs background to follow the body)

<minimal context>

## Reproduction / Evidence  (for bugs)

<commands, inputs, observed vs expected, with code blocks where appropriate>

## Proposal  (optional)

<direction, not full implementation>
```

Section headings are optional for short issues — a 5-line body often needs no headings at all.

### 3. Discharge evidence claims

Discharge every evidence claim in the draft, as `gh-body-conventions` § Evidence claims defines one — across all sections, not only the `## Reproduction / Evidence` slot that asks for commands run and results observed.
Run this in main context: the record the rule compares against is the drafting session's own, which a subagent does not have.

Editing the body here is expected; the laundering pass runs on the result.

### 4. Laundering pass — run `gh-body-audit`

Run `gh-body-audit` against the drafted body with artifact kind `issue`. It returns a ✅ / ⚠ status. Mandatory before every `gh-post issue create` / `gh-post issue comment`. Any ⚠ blocks step 5 on `gh-body-audit` step 4's terms.

See `gh-body-audit/SKILL.md` for the procedure.

### 5. Show for approval

Present the laundered draft to the user verbatim before filing. Do not file without confirmation.

If the user requests changes, revise, re-discharge its evidence claims, re-run the laundering pass, and re-show. Do not file partially — the next step runs only after explicit approval.

### 6. File

Write the laundered body to a temp file, then invoke the wrapper:

```bash
gh-post issue create \
  --repo <owner>/<repo> \
  --title "<title>" \
  --body-file /tmp/<descriptive-name>.md
```

Add a `--label` flag to `gh-post issue create` for each of these, and no other labels:

- `perishable`, when the premise is code-coupled by step 1's premise-type classification and the target repo has a label named `perishable`. When the premise is code-coupled and the target repo has no such label, offer to create it there; if the user accepts, create it and add it.
- Each label the user asked this issue to carry, and each label the target repo states this issue must carry.

### 7. Report

After filing, show the user:

- The issue number and URL.
- Any follow-up actions (e.g., linking from a parent umbrella issue, mentioning in a PR).

From ultimatile/development-skills, MIT.

More from ultimatile/development-skills

Signals

Stars
0
Forks
0
Open issues
71
Last commit (this folder)
Oct 18, 2026 (12 days ago)

From GitHub (fetched Oct 24, 2026).

Details

License
MIT
First seen
Oct 24, 2026
Last checked
Oct 24, 2026

More from ultimatile

Done for you

Rather not set it up yourself?

Chalk Labs scopes, builds and runs agents for your team: the task audit, the eval harness, the integrations and the weekly ops report. Fixed scope, priced before we start.

See how we build AI agents →Read the case studies

Chalk Labs is a two-founder AI and growth studio. We build AI agents, CRMs and MVPs for Web3 and AI companies, and have shipped 50+ product and token launches.

launches shipped
50+
launches shipped
media placements
500+
media placements
founders on every account
2
founders on every account

Press we've placed: Forbes · CoinDesk · Decrypt · Cointelegraph · The Block

Rahil Jain, Co-founder, Chalk Labs. Ex-Goldman Sachs engineer. You talk to the person who builds it.

Get file-issue running in your business

Tell us what you want to automate. A founder replies within one working day with a plan, not a pitch deck.

Goes to the Chalk Labs founders, not the newsletter. Privacy

Need help deploying file-issue?

CallGet help
Cite this page

file-issue skill. Agent Mart. https://agentmart.dev/skills/ultimatile-file-issue (last updated 2026-10-24)