agentleFS
chinthakatchinthakat/agent-skills/skills/issue-ledger/SKILL.md

issue-ledger

Skill0 starsChanged 53 days agoMITView on GitHub

Record an issue you found but are not fixing now, so that it is still actionable months later, and close one with evidence. Use whenever an audit, review or unrelated task surfaces a problem that is out of scope, and whenever marking a tracked item done.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈4

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Keep them on separate lines.

    line 46
  2. Distinctive:

    Every count carries the environment it was measured in and the date it was measured.

    line 54
  3. Distinctive:

    Keep it in the repository, next to the code, in version control.

    line 95
  4. Distinctive:

    Put the id in the commit message, the branch name, the code comment for a deliberate workaround, and the test that pins the current …

    line 101

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

The issue ledger

Work finds problems that are not the work. The choice is between fixing them now (scope creep), forgetting them (the usual outcome), and writing them down in a form that survives.

Most trackers fail at the third. An entry reading "the export is broken for some users" is worse than nothing — it carries enough guilt to keep it alive and not enough information to act on.

1. What an entry must contain

A stable id, and then:

FieldWhy
What is wrongOne sentence, stated as an observation
Entity idsThe exact rows, files, routes or records. Not descriptions
Where it was measuredWhich environment, which layer, which date
How to see it againThe command, query or steps
What is affectedWho experiences it, how often
Why it was not fixedScope, risk, needs a decision, needs access
What fixing it would takeEven a rough shape

Entity ids are the field people skip and the one that matters most. Titles get edited, counts change, "the third item on the dashboard" moves. Six months later, an entry with ids can be re-checked in a minute; an entry without them has to be re-investigated from scratch, and usually is not.

2. Separate what you saw from what you concluded

Observed: 12 records (ids: a1b2, c3d4, ...) have status 'active' with no owner.
Inferred: probably the 2026-03 import, which did not set owner.

The observation stays true. The inference is a hypothesis from the state of your knowledge on the day, and it is frequently wrong — the fix that follows an unchallenged old inference is a rewrite of the wrong thing.

Keep them on separate lines. Label them.

3. Record the layer and the date

"Eight courses have no assessment" is not a fact on its own. Measured against source files in March, it may never have been true of what users were served, and it is certainly not true now.

Every count carries the environment it was measured in and the date it was measured. Both. An old number without a date will be read as current.

4. Write it for a stranger

The reader is someone else, or you having forgotten everything. Assume no context from the conversation that produced the entry.

  • Expand the abbreviation the first time.
  • Link the file, the run, the log, the conversation.
  • Say what "broken" means concretely — what the user sees, versus what they should see.
  • Include the failing output, trimmed to the part that matters.

5. Closing an entry states what was verified

DONE on its own is an assertion. What belongs there instead:

DONE 2026-09-21 — backfilled owner on all 12; re-ran the audit against
production, 0 matches. Import fixed at src/import/owner.ts:44 so it cannot
recur. Verified in the UI for a1b2.

Three things: what changed, how it was confirmed, and whether the cause is fixed or just the symptom. An entry closed without the third one comes back, and nobody realises it is the same problem.

Closing as "not doing this" is a legitimate outcome and deserves the same treatment: why, and what would change the decision.

6. Triage, or the ledger becomes a graveyard

A list that only grows stops being read, and once it stops being read, adding to it is just filing.

  • Give each entry a severity, and define what the levels mean.
  • Review the list on a cadence. Close what is stale, merge duplicates, reject what will never be done.
  • Watch for clusters — five entries about the same subsystem is one entry about that subsystem.
  • Keep it in the repository, next to the code, in version control. The history of the ledger is itself informative, and a tracker somewhere else is a tracker nobody opens while working.

7. Reference the id everywhere

Put the id in the commit message, the branch name, the code comment for a deliberate workaround, and the test that pins the current behaviour. That is what makes the ledger navigable in both directions — from an entry to the work, and from a strange line of code to the reason it exists.

Template

### PI-142 — Export omits archived items for some tenants

**Status:** OPEN · **Severity:** 2 · **Found:** 2026-09-21 (production)

**Observed:** CSV export for tenants t_88f2, t_91ac omits items with
status='archived'. Ids: it_3391, it_3392, it_4410.
Reproduce: `node scripts/export.js --tenant t_88f2 --prod` then grep for it_3391.

**Inferred:** the export filter was copied from the picker query, which
correctly excludes archived. Not confirmed.

**Impact:** tenants using exports for their own audit trail lose history.
2 tenants confirmed; not measured across all.

**Not fixed because:** changing the filter changes every export; needs a
decision on whether archived rows belong in the default export or behind a flag.

**Shape of a fix:** separate query for export; add `--include-archived`.

Checklist

  • Stable id, referenced from commits and code comments
  • Entity ids recorded, not descriptions
  • Environment and date on every measurement
  • Observation and inference separated and labelled
  • Reproduction steps that work without the original context
  • Reason it was not fixed, and the shape of a fix
  • Closure states what changed, how it was verified, and whether the cause is fixed
  • Ledger in version control and reviewed on a cadence

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.