Closed Issue Plan Refile Loop

Closed-Issue Plan Re-file Loop

Use when a plan issue was previously closed or parked because of review infrastructure limits, governance drift, or other meta blockers, and you need to revive it safely.

When this fits

• A plan issue was closed with preserved artifacts
• A later infrastructure/governance fix makes re-review worthwhile
• You need to reopen the issue, revise the plan, run a fresh adversarial review wave, and avoid falsely surfacing it as approval-ready

Core pattern

1. Recover prior state

• Read the preserved local plan
• Read prior review artifacts and closure/governance comments
• Verify live issue state with gh issue view
• Verify current repo reality for any facts the old plan depended on

2. Rewrite as a conservative re-file draft

• Keep the same canonical local plan file if it is still the source of truth
• Change the header/status to draft, not plan-review
• Add revision history explaining why the new draft exists
• Remove stale claims about prior issue state, missing artifacts, or old blocker assumptions
• Convert previous review findings into explicit plan sections/contracts instead of leaving them as comments only

3. Reopen the GitHub issue before fresh review

• Reopen with a comment explaining the re-file basis
• Reopening does NOT imply the plan is approval-ready

4. Run a fresh adversarial review wave immediately

• Generate new provider artifacts (at minimum Codex; Gemini if available)
• Treat fresh MAJOR findings as authoritative over the reopened state
• Expect iterative tightening; a reopened issue often still needs multiple passes

5. Keep governance state conservative until the review wave is green

• Do NOT restore status:plan-review just because the issue was reopened
• Do NOT recreate approval-ready posture while fresh review still returns MAJOR
• Post a governance comment summarizing the latest artifacts and current blocker themes
• Update docs/plans/README.md to reflect the reopened draft state, e.g. draft (vN re-file in progress)

6. Commit only the planning artifacts

• Stage explicit paths only
• Commit plan file + README row + new review artifacts together
• Push and verify origin/main contains the new planning state

Practical lessons

• Reopening an issue is cheap; restoring approval-state labels is not. Separate those actions.
• Fresh review artifacts outrank stale closed-state summaries.
• A preserved plan file can remain the canonical path, but its header and README row must be updated to match the reopened draft reality.
• A GitHub comment linking fresh review artifacts is important so the live issue reflects why it is reopened yet still not approval-ready.

Minimal verification

• gh issue view NNN --json state,labels,comments
• git status --short
• git rev-parse HEAD origin/main
• confirm new review artifact files exist
• confirm README row matches the reopened/draft state

Example outcomes

Good end state after a first re-file pass:

• issue reopened
• local plan revised to draft
• fresh Codex/Gemini review artifacts added
• governance comment posted
• no status:plan-review label yet if MAJOR findings remain

Only after the fresh review wave is approval-ready should the issue advance back into the normal status:plan-review -> user approval flow.