agentleFS
foversefoverse/seoverse/.agents/skills/simple-issue-description/SKILL.md

simple-issue-description

Skill4 starsChanged 10 days agoMITView on GitHub

Turn a rough bug report, feature request, support note, or pull request into a short, plain-language issue focused on the problem and desired behavior. Use when a contributor asks to simplify an issue, explain what a PR is for, create the corresponding issue for a PR, remove implementation detail from a report, or invokes /simple-issue-description.

3 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Steady: 0 new projects took it in the last 4 weeks, none the 4 weeks before.thin data

Week of Sep 13: 0 new projectsWeek of Sep 20: 0 new projectsWeek of Sep 27: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 4: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 11: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 18: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 25: 0 new projectsWeek of Nov 1: 0 new projects
Sep 2026Oct 2026Nov 2026
New projects taking a version of this file each week, over the 8 weeks our latest run read: only 0 in all, so this is a hint, not a trend.

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

12 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈12

    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:

    Write an issue a maintainer can understand in under a minute.

    line 8
  2. Distinctive:

    Read the supplied notes, conversation, issue, PR description, or diff.

    line 12
  3. Distinctive:

    Keep only context that helps someone understand or reproduce the problem.

    line 15
  4. Distinctive:

    If the source is a PR or diff, describe the problem the change tries to solve, not the files or code it changes.

    line 16
  5. Distinctive:

    If the source adds a capability instead of fixing a misbehavior, do not stage the absence as a bug.

    line 21
  6. Distinctive:

    If the source fixes a security weakness that is not already public, do not draft a public issue describing it.

    line 25
  7. Distinctive:

    Use plain language and short sentences.

    line 29
  8. Distinctive:

    Keep the issue under 200 words unless it is clear that more is necessary to describe the reproduction steps or a large feature.

    line 30
  9. Distinctive:

    Keep technical details only when they are necessary to reproduce or understand the problem.

    line 32
  10. Distinctive:

    Do not mention that AI wrote or reviewed the issue.

    line 34
  11. Distinctive:

    Avoid filler, praise, roadmap language, and exhaustive edge cases.

    line 35
  12. Distinctive:

    Use the contributor's level of certainty.

    line 36

≈ “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

Simple Issue Description

Write an issue a maintainer can understand in under a minute. Focus on what someone experiences and what should happen instead.

Workflow

  1. Read the supplied notes, conversation, issue, PR description, or diff. In a PR, also check for spec, design doc, or README changes — they often state the intent better than the description does.
  2. Identify the concrete problem. State who or what is affected when the source makes that clear.
  3. Describe the desired behavior without prescribing an implementation.
  4. Keep only context that helps someone understand or reproduce the problem.
  5. If the source is a PR or diff, describe the problem the change tries to solve, not the files or code it changes.
  6. Draft the issue immediately unless the problem and desired behavior cannot be determined. In that case, ask one short clarifying question.

One issue per problem. If the source bundles unrelated problems, draft the issue for the most significant one, list the others in a line each, and tell the contributor to split them into separate issues and separate pull requests.

If the source adds a capability instead of fixing a misbehavior, do not stage the absence as a bug. Describe what a user cannot do today and the full user experience of the feature: who uses it, from where, and what they see.

Do not invent user impact, reproduction steps, or certainty that the source does not support. If the source only shows cleanup, refactoring, or a possible code smell, say that no concrete problem is clear instead of manufacturing an issue — this rule wins over step 6. Reply with two or three sentences: what the source shows, and what evidence would make it issue-worthy.

If the source fixes a security weakness that is not already public, do not draft a public issue describing it. Suggest reporting it privately to the maintainer instead.

Writing rules

  • Use plain language and short sentences.
  • Keep the issue under 200 words unless it is clear that more is necessary to describe the reproduction steps or a large feature.
  • Lead with behavior, not code, architecture, or the proposed fix. A one-sentence plain-language cause is fine when the symptom cannot be understood without it.
  • Keep technical details only when they are necessary to reproduce or understand the problem. Limits and defaults that make the symptom make sense (batch sizes, quotas, caps) count as necessary.
  • Preserve useful evidence such as error messages, screenshots, links, and documentation references.
  • Do not mention that AI wrote or reviewed the issue.
  • Avoid filler, praise, roadmap language, and exhaustive edge cases.
  • Use the contributor's level of certainty. Do not present a guess as a confirmed bug; write "can" or "appears to" when the source describes a risk rather than an observed failure.

Output format

The first line is the issue title — when filing on GitHub, put it in the title field instead of repeating it in the body. For a missing capability, title the outcome ("Flag pages with no structured data") rather than a fake bug ("Audits never mention structured data").

Omit the Extra context section when there is nothing useful to add. Constraints and scope notes belong there, including what is not affected when a maintainer would reasonably worry that it is.

# <Short title describing the problem or desired outcome>

## TL;DR

<In one or two sentences, explain what happens now and what should happen instead.>

## What is happening?

<Describe the current behavior in plain language. Include a concrete example when available.>

## What should happen?

<Describe the desired behavior without proposing how to build it.>

## Extra context

<Optional reproduction steps, error text, screenshots, links, or constraints.>

Example

# The chat jumps away from messages I am reading

## TL;DR

When I scroll up to read an older message, a new response moves me back to the bottom of the chat. The chat should stay where I left it until I choose to return to the latest message.

## What is happening?

New responses automatically scroll the chat to the bottom, even when I am reading earlier messages.

## What should happen?

Keep my current scroll position and show that a new message is available.

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.