/SKILL

/issue - GitHub Issue Generator

Generate a GitHub Issue with a structured title and body, verifying drafted claims via premise check and critic-design challenge before posting.

Input

$ARGUMENTS is the issue description. If empty, prompt for it via AskUserQuestion.

Language

Read language from ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../settings.json and translate the issue body and templates into that language. If unset, default to English. Keep technical terms, code, and identifiers untranslated.

Execution

1. Read .claude/OUTCOME.md; if absent, generate the stub via /outcome
2. Detect type from description (§ Type Detection)
3. Select the template (§ Template Source)
4. Generate title + body following template; mark fixed/tentative (§ Confidence Marking)
5. Filter drafted claims via premise check (§ Premise Check)
6. Refine body inline against ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/prose-review.md plus the empty-phrase file matching the body language (${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/phrases.ja.md for Japanese, ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/phrases.en.md for English)
7. Verify premises via /challenge (GO / NO-GO), feature / bug only (§ Adversarial Challenge)
8. Preview issue + tentative items → AskUserQuestion: "Create this issue?"
9. Write the body to a temp file, attach labels, and run gh issue create --body-file (§ Labels; sandbox-compatible, avoids escaping a long body)
10. Capture issue URL from command output

Type Detection

Default to feature if unclear. The title takes a bracketed prefix of the capitalized type.

Type	When to use
bug	Something existing is broken or not working as expected
feature	New capability or enhancement request
docs	Documentation additions or corrections
chore	Maintenance, config, or dependency updates

Template Source

Prefer a repository Issue template; fall back to the skill's bundled template. Detect by listing .md files via gh api "repos/{owner}/{repo}/contents/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE" --jq '.[].name'. Whichever becomes the skeleton, the rest of the flow (Confidence Marking → Premise Check → prose review → challenge) runs the same.

Priority	Condition	Template to use
1	A GitHub template matches the type (filename or name contains the type)	Read its body; strip the leading frontmatter (name / about / labels / title) for the skeleton
2	No match	${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/templates/<type>.md

Confidence Marking

Mark which parts of the body are fixed vs tentative, so the implementer can tell a requirement to honor from an undecided judgment or unverified fact.

• A first pass, not a verification pass; settling facts is delegated to Premise Check.
• Mark sparingly, only where it changes implementer action. Marking every line buries the marks that matter and defeats the distinction.
• Tentative marks stay inline at the item they qualify. The Premises section stays reserved for issue-level premises that do not attach to a specific line (design refs, global assumptions).
• At the preview, collect the inline tentative marks plus the Premises into a tentative block, adding no new content and mirroring what the body already carries; omit it when there are zero tentative items.
• The marker word follows the language setting in ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../settings.json (仮 under Japanese).

Origin	State	Notation	Action phrase
User decided it, or it is the ask (What & Why, Acceptance Criteria, explicit Scope / Constraints)	fixed	unmarked	-
AI-inferred HOW (placement, approach, format), or a decision the user left open	tentative	(tentative: ...)	"decide at pickup" / "change if a better fit appears"
Fact not yet verified (residual Premise Check could not settle)	tentative	(tentative: ...)	"recheck at pickup"

Premise Check

Sifts the claims already drafted into the body. Not a discovery phase. No agent spawns inside this check, no cross-codebase audit, no digging beyond the drafted claims themselves. A factual claim resolves into an assertion by default; downgrade to tentative only when it cannot.

Claim type	Action
Current-code claim	Verify with 2-3 targeted Read / ugrep checks; annotate the basis in body ("grep-confirmed")
Claim still ambiguous after checking	Downgrade to tentative; never assert it as fact
Claim contradicted by the source	Rewrite the body to match the source. If the mismatch itself matters, state it under Premises with the verification ask
External design ref	Always unverified; the skill cannot judge whether the source is current, so add a link + "confirm latest before starting"
Target file list	Annotate "candidates as of writing; recheck on pickup"
Code example in body	Annotate as a reference, not the implementation ("reference shape; final form decided at pickup")

Adversarial Challenge

Run Skill("challenge", <drafted title + body>) only for feature or bug (skip when empty). The returned verdict and findings never enter the issue body; collect them into the preview's challenge block. They are review material at confirm time, and the final call to fold or dismiss stays with the user.

Verdict	Handling
GO	Proceed to preview. If conditions are appended, present them as ephemeral critique; fold only what belongs in the body, once
NO-GO	Present the refuting evidence at preview; leave post / revise / drop to the user

Labels

priority:* is required, set to critical / high / medium / low by impact. For other labels, follow the repository's conventions.