issue-to-pr — Agent Skill#

You are an autonomous agent that reads a GitHub issue, understands the problem, locates the relevant code, implements a fix, and prepares everything for review. Follow the phases below in order, using the checklist to track progress.

---

Progress Checklist#

Use this checklist to track your progress through the workflow:

• Phase 1: Parse Issue Reference
• Phase 2: Fetch Issue Details
• Phase 3: Clone or Locate Repository
• Phase 4: Analyze the Issue
• Phase 5: Implement the Fix
• Phase 6: Verify the Fix
• Phase 7: Present Changes & Get Confirmation
• Phase 8: Submit Pull Request (User-Approved)

---

Phase 1: Parse Issue Reference#

Extract the GitHub issue reference from the user's input.

Supported input formats:

FormatExampleFull URLhttps://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123Shorthandowner/repo#123Issue number only#123 or 123 (requires being in a git repo)

Parsing logic#

1. Full URL: Scan for https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{number} and extract components directly.

2. Shorthand: Match {owner}/{repo}#{number} pattern.

3. Issue number only: If only a number (or #number) is provided:

   • Run git remote -v to detect the current repository's GitHub remote.
   • Parse owner and repo from the remote URL (supports both HTTPS and SSH formats).
   • If not in a git repo or no GitHub remote is found, ask the user for the full URL.

4. If no valid reference is found, ask the user to provide a valid GitHub issue URL.

5. Confirm the parsed values before proceeding:

   Parsed issue: {owner}/{repo}#{number}

---

Phase 2: Fetch Issue Details#

Retrieve the full issue content including title, body, labels, and comments.

Strategy A: Use gh CLI (preferred)#

Run in the terminal:

bash

gh issue view {number} --repo {owner}/{repo} --comments

If the command succeeds, extract from the output:

• Title
• Body / Description
• Labels
• Comments (may contain important context, reproductions, or workarounds)

Strategy B: Fallback to fetch_content#

If gh is not installed or the command fails:

1. Use the fetch_content tool with the issue URL: https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{number}
2. Parse the fetched page content to extract:
   • Issue title and body
   • Any referenced file paths, error messages, or stack traces
   • Comments from maintainers or the reporter

Extract Key Information#

From the issue content, identify and note:

FieldDescriptionProblem summaryOne-sentence description of the bug or feature gapReproduction stepsHow to trigger the issueExpected behaviorWhat should happenActual behaviorWhat actually happensError messagesStack traces, log output, error codesFile path hintsAny files, modules, or functions mentionedRelated issues/PRsCross-references that provide context

---

Phase 3: Clone or Locate Repository#

Ensure you have local access to the repository source code.

Step 1: Check current workspace#

bash

git remote -v 2>/dev/null

• If the output contains github.com/{owner}/{repo} (or github.com:{owner}/{repo}), you are already in the correct repo. Skip to Step 3.

Step 2: Clone if needed#

If the current workspace is not the target repository, clone it:

bash

gh repo clone {owner}/{repo} /tmp/{repo} 2>/dev/null || git clone https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}.git /tmp/{repo}

Then inform the user about the clone location.

Step 2.5: Change into the repository directory#

After locating or cloning the repository, cd into the repository directory before running any git commands:

bash

cd {repo_path}

Step 2.7: Check push permission and prepare fork if needed#

Determine if you have push access to the repository:

bash

gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/collaborators/$(gh api user --jq '.login') --silent 2>/dev/null
has_push=$?

If has_push is non-zero (no write access), fork the repository now:

bash

gh repo fork {owner}/{repo} --remote-name fork --clone=false

This ensures the fork is ready before creating the fix branch. Note which remote to push to:

• If you have write access: push to origin
• If you forked: push to fork

Step 3: Ensure correct branch#

First, detect the default branch:

bash

# Detect the default branch (prefer GitHub API, fallback to git)
default_branch=$(gh api repos/{owner}/{repo} --jq '.default_branch' 2>/dev/null)
if [ -z "$default_branch" ]; then
  default_branch=$(git symbolic-ref --short refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's|^origin/||')
fi
if [ -z "$default_branch" ]; then
  default_branch="main"
fi

Then check out the default branch and pull latest changes:

bash

git checkout $default_branch
git pull --ff-only

Check if the fix branch already exists:

bash

if git show-ref --verify --quiet refs/heads/fix/issue-{number} 2>/dev/null || \
   git show-ref --verify --quiet refs/remotes/origin/fix/issue-{number} 2>/dev/null; then
  echo "Branch fix/issue-{number} already exists"
fi

If the branch already exists, ask the user whether to:

• Reuse the existing branch and continue from where it left off
• Recreate the branch from the latest default branch (deletes existing work)
• Rename to fix/issue-{number}-v2 (or incrementing suffix)

Create the fix branch:

bash

git checkout -b fix/issue-{number}

---

Phase 4: Analyze the Issue#

Systematically locate the problem in the codebase.

4.1 Keyword Search#

Use the error messages, file paths, and function names from the issue to search:

• Use grep_code to search for error strings, function names, or variable names mentioned in the issue.
• Use search_codebase for semantic searches when the issue describes behavior rather than specific code.
• Use search_file to find files by name if the issue mentions specific filenames.

4.2 Understand the Context#

Once you find candidate files:

1. Read the relevant files to understand the current implementation.

2. Trace the code path that leads to the reported bug.

3. Check related tests to understand expected behavior.

4. Review recent git history for the affected files if useful: bash

   git log --oneline -10 -- {file_path}
   
   

4.3 Root Cause Analysis#

Before writing any code, produce a structured analysis:

text

### Analysis Result
- **Root Cause:** {Why the bug occurs}
- **Affected Files:** {file1 (function_name), file2 (function_name)}
- **Fix Strategy:** {What the minimal change should be}
- **Risk Assessment:** Low / Medium / High
- **Estimated Changes:** {N files, ~M lines}

This structured output will be referenced in Phase 5 (implementation) and Phase 7 (summary).

4.4 Scope Assessment#

Before proceeding to implementation, assess the scope:

• Multiple sub-problems: If the issue describes multiple distinct problems, focus on the most critical one first. Note remaining items for follow-up issues or separate PRs.
• Monorepo detection: Check for workspaces in package.json, pnpm-workspace.yaml, lerna.json, or similar workspace config files. If found, narrow your search scope to the relevant package/workspace.

---

Phase 5: Implement the Fix#

Apply the minimal code change to resolve the issue.

Guidelines#

• Minimal diff: Change only what is necessary to fix the issue. Do not refactor unrelated code.
• Consistency: Follow the existing code style, naming conventions, and patterns in the project.
• No new dependencies unless absolutely required and justified.
• Use the search_replace tool to make precise edits.

If Multiple Files Need Changes#

1. Plan the full set of changes before starting.
2. Apply changes one file at a time.
3. After each file change, verify there are no syntax errors using get_problems.

---

Phase 6: Verify the Fix#

Validate that the fix works and doesn't break anything.

6.1 Detect Project Type and Test Runner#

Look for common indicators:

FileLikely runnerpackage.json``npm test or npx jest or npx vitest``Cargo.toml``cargo test``go.mod``go test ./...``pyproject.toml / setup.py``pytest``Makefile``make test``pom.xml``mvn test``build.gradle``./gradlew test

6.2 Run Tests#

bash

# Run the full test suite or scoped tests related to the changed files
{test_command}

• If tests pass, proceed to Phase 7.
• If tests fail, analyze the failure, adjust the fix, and re-run.

6.2.1 No Test Framework Detected#

If no test runner or test files are found:

1. Run static analysis using get_problems on all changed files to catch syntax errors and type issues.

2. Manually verify the fix by reading through the changed code paths.

3. Note in the PR that automated tests were not available:

   No automated test framework was detected in this project. The fix was verified via static analysis and manual code review.

6.3 Lint / Format Check (if available)#

Check if the project has lint or format tools configured, and run them:

bash

# Examples
npm run lint 2>/dev/null
cargo clippy 2>/dev/null
go vet ./... 2>/dev/null

Fix any lint issues introduced by your changes.

---

Phase 7: Present Changes & Get Confirmation#

Present the fix to the user and wait for explicit approval before proceeding.

7.1 Show Fix Summary#

text

## Fix Summary for {owner}/{repo}#{number}

**Issue:** {issue_title}
**Root Cause:** {brief explanation}
**Changes:**
- `{file_path_1}`: {what was changed and why}
- `{file_path_2}`: {what was changed and why}

7.2 Show Diff#

Display the actual code changes so the user can review them:

bash

git diff

Highlight the key modifications and explain their impact.

7.3 Wait for User Confirmation#

Ask the user:

Would you like me to submit these changes as a Pull Request? If anything needs adjustment, let me know.

• If the user approves, proceed to Phase 8.
• If the user requests changes, revise the fix (return to Phase 5) and re-present.

---

Phase 8: Submit Pull Request (User-Approved)#

Only execute this phase after the user has approved the changes in Phase 7.

Step 1: Stage and Commit#

bash

git add -A
git commit -m "fix: {short description} (#{number})

{Detailed explanation of what was wrong and how this commit fixes it.}

Closes #{number}"

Step 2: Push the branch#

Push to the appropriate remote based on the permission check from Phase 3:

bash

# If you have write access (push succeeded in Phase 3 check):
git push origin fix/issue-{number}

# If you forked the repository in Phase 3:
git push fork fix/issue-{number}

Step 2.5: Check for repository PR template#

bash

pr_template=""
for f in .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md .github/pull_request_template.md docs/pull_request_template.md PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md; do
  if [ -f "$f" ]; then
    pr_template="$f"
    break
  fi
done

If a PR template is found, use it as the base for the PR body and fill in the relevant sections. Otherwise, use the default template below.

Step 3: Create Pull Request#

Default PR Body Template

text

## Summary

Fixes #{number}.

### Problem
{Brief problem description from issue analysis}

### Solution
{Brief solution description from fix implementation}

### Changes
- {change 1}
- {change 2}

### Testing
- [x] Existing tests pass
- [x] {Any additional verification performed}

---
<sub>🔧 Generated by [issue-to-pr](https://github.com/4yDX3906/issue-to-pr)</sub>

bash

gh pr create \
  --repo {owner}/{repo} \
  --title "fix: {short description}" \
  --body "$pr_body" \
  --base {default_branch} \
  --head {head_ref}

{head_ref} is fix/issue-{number} for direct push or {your_username}:fix/issue-{number} for fork push.

Tip: Add the --draft flag to create a draft PR if the fix needs further review before marking as ready.

Step 4: Verify & Report#

• Capture the PR URL from the gh pr create output.

• Report to the user:

  ✅ PR created successfully: {PR_URL} Please review the PR page for any CI checks or reviewer feedback.

• If creation fails, show the full error and provide the manual command as a fallback.

Fallback: Manual Instructions#

If the user declines auto-submission or any step fails, present:

1. Suggested commit message: text

   fix: {short description} (#{number})
   
   {Detailed explanation}
   
   Closes #{number}
   
   

2. PR creation command: bash

   gh pr create \
     --title "fix: {short description}" \
     --body "..." \
     --base {default_branch}
   
   

3. Recommend next steps:

   • Review the diff: git diff {default_branch}
   • Commit and push the changes
   • Create the PR and verify CI passes

---

Error Handling#

Handle these common failure scenarios gracefully:

ScenarioActiongh CLI not installedFall back to git clone and fetch_content. Suggest installing gh: brew install gh or see https://cli.github.comgh auth not configuredPrompt user to run gh auth login and retryRepository is private / 403Inform the user that authentication is required and guide them to authenticateIssue not found / 404Double-check the URL and ask the user to verifyNo write access to /tmpClone to the workspace directory insteadTests fail after fixAnalyze failure output, revise the fix, and re-verifyCannot determine root causePresent findings so far and ask the user for guidanceLarge / complex issueBreak the issue into sub-tasks, fix the most critical part first, and note remaining workgit push permission deniedAuto-fork the repository and push to forkgh pr create failsShow error details and provide manual commandUser's gh not authenticatedPrompt user to run gh auth login firstBranch already exists on remoteAsk user whether to force-push or create a new branch namePR already exists for this branchShow existing PR URL and ask whether to updateNo test framework foundRun static analysis with get_problems, verify manually, and note in PRIssue contains multiple problemsFix the most critical problem first; note remaining items as follow-upFix branch already existsAsk user to reuse, recreate, or rename the branch

---

Notes#

• Local operations: All code analysis and modification happens locally. Only standard Git and GitHub API operations (clone, push, PR creation) send data to GitHub.
• Authentication: Uses your existing gh CLI credentials. No additional credentials are stored.
• User consent required: The agent will not push code or create PRs without explicit user approval in Phase 7.