tomimor GH Issue Triage
Find the top 3 GitHub issues in the current repo that are best suited for an AI agent to pick up, and produce a kickoff prompt for each.
This skill is read-only. Never assign, label, or comment on any issue — the output is for the user to act on.
Resolve the current repo
Run from the user's cwd:
gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q .nameWithOwner
If that fails, tell the user the cwd is not a GitHub repo (or gh is not
authenticated) and stop.
Fetch candidate issues
Pull open + unassigned issues that have no linked PR:
gh issue list --repo OWNER/REPO --state open --limit 50 \
--search "no:assignee -linked:pr sort:updated-desc" \
--json number,title,body,url,labels,comments,createdAt,updatedAt,author
If the result is empty, print No AI-ready issues in OWNER/REPO and stop.
Score each issue
Apply this rubric to every issue using its body, labels, and comment metadata. Each dimension scores 0–3 for a total of 0–15.
| Dimension | 3 (great) | 0 (bad) |
|---|---|---|
| Clarity | Concrete problem statement, no ambiguity | Vague or one-line title with no body |
| Scope | Acceptance criteria stated or strongly implied | Open-ended "improve X" with no boundary |
| Self-contained | No business/product decisions or private context needed | Requires stakeholder input or hidden context |
| Size | Doable in a single AI session | "Rewrite the module" or cross-cutting refactor |
| Signal | good first issue / help wanted / ai-ready labels, low comment count, no debate |
Heated thread, conflicting requirements |
Hard disqualifiers
Skip the issue (do not include in the ranking) if any of these are true:
- Body or comments call for upfront design ("needs design", "needs spec", "TBD") or flag the issue as blocked on another task or external input.
- Security-sensitive (auth, crypto, secrets handling) without clear scope.
- Comment thread shows reviewers disagreeing on the desired behavior.
- Title or labels indicate a question, discussion, or RFC — not work.
Pick the top 3
Sort by total score descending; break ties by updatedAt (most recent first).
If fewer than 3 issues clear the rubric, return as many as qualify. Never pad
the list to 3.
Output format
Render the headers, links, and bullets as plain markdown so the issue links stay clickable. Render the kickoff prompt itself inside a fenced code block so the user can copy it in one click and paste it into a fresh agent chat.
One block per pick, separated by ---:
## Top AI-ready issues in OWNER/REPO
### 1. [#NUMBER — Title](URL)
- Score: 13/15 (Clarity 3, Scope 3, Self-contained 2, Size 3, Signal 2)
- Labels: bug, good first issue
- Why it's AI-ready: <2-3 sentences distilled from the issue>
Kickoff prompt:
```
Implement issue #NUMBER in OWNER/REPO: <title>.
Context: <one-paragraph summary of the problem from the issue body>.
Acceptance criteria:
- <criterion 1>
- <criterion 2>
Out of scope: <anything explicitly deferred in the issue>.
Reference: <issue URL>
```
---
### 2. ...
The kickoff prompt is the deliverable — it must be self-contained enough to paste into a fresh agent chat (Cursor, Codex, Claude Code) and start work without further questions.
After the last pick, print a one-line summary:
Scanned N open issues in OWNER/REPO, M passed the rubric, top K shown.
Anti-patterns
- Do NOT invent acceptance criteria the issue does not state. If the issue is light on detail, lower the Scope score; do not fabricate.
- Do NOT pick issues with active reviewer debate, even if otherwise clear.
- Do NOT pad the list to 3 when fewer issues qualify.
- Do NOT include the full issue body in the kickoff prompt — distill it.
- Do NOT recommend issues assigned to someone or already linked to a PR; the search query should exclude them, but double-check before ranking.