ci-fix
Skill825 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Diagnose and fix GitHub Actions CI failures. Inspects workflow runs and logs, identifies root causes, implements minimal fixes, and pushes to a fix branch. Use when CI is failing, red, broken, or needs diagnosis.
- Commits and pushes
8 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- stoa-platform/stoatheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- oasm-platform/open-asmtheir own version, first seen Oct 29, 2026
- davidanthonyn/claude-skillsword for word, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- Cosmian/kmstheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- FastLED/FastLEDtheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- dotnet/mauitheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use pr-review.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
MicrosoftSkillpr-review
Verify the technical accuracy of a vscode-docs pull request against the VS Code source code in microsoft/vscode. Use when reviewing a docs PR for factual correctness: setting names, command IDs, default values, API shapes, keybindings, versioned availability, and described behavior.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions8 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- davidanthonyn/claude-skills★ 0100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 7
- dotnet/maui★ 23ksame name
- FastLED/FastLED★ 7.5ksame name
- Cosmian/kms★ 372same name
- oasm-platform/open-asm★ 272same name
- jMerta/codex-skills★ 130same name
- Twigpine/openclaude-skills★ 19same name
- stoa-platform/stoa★ 9same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- analysis-artifactsSkill
- create-pull-requestSkill
- dbt-model-indexSkill
- docs-updateSkill
- github-bug-report-triageSkill
- github-issue-dedupeSkill
- mcp-builderSkill
- schedulerSkill
- seo-aeo-auditSkill
- slack-qa-investigateSkill
- terraform-style-checkSkill
- web-accessibility-auditSkill
- webapp-testingSkill
- web-performance-auditSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 7 edited versions we read keep these.
8
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 13
Verify GitHub CLI authentication before proceeding:
- Very specific: line 19
If not authenticated, instruct the user to run gh auth login first.
- Distinctive: line 31
If working from a branch or run ID:
- Distinctive: line 62
Prefer the smallest fix that resolves the issue.
- Distinctive: line 69
Keep changes to the failing job/step when possible
- Distinctive: line 70
If modifying workflow files, preserve existing permissions and avoid expanding token access
- Distinctive: line 74
Create or update a dedicated fix branch:
- Distinctive: line 85
If the fix branch already exists, update it:
- Very specific: line 114
Avoid pull_request_target unless explicitly requested—it can expose secrets to untrusted code
- Very specific: line 115
Keep workflow permissions: minimal.
- Distinctive: line 120
After fixing, provide a brief summary:
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 7 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
CI Fix
Diagnose CI failures and implement fixes with minimal, targeted diffs. Pushes fixes to a dedicated branch without creating PRs.
Prerequisites
Verify GitHub CLI authentication before proceeding:
gh auth statusIf not authenticated, instruct the user to run gh auth login first.
Workflow
1. Locate the Failing Run
Determine the failing workflow run. If working on a PR branch:
gh pr view --json statusCheckRollup --jq '.statusCheckRollup[] | select(.conclusion == "FAILURE")'If working from a branch or run ID:
gh run list --branch <branch> --status failure --limit 5
gh run view <run-id> --verbose2. Extract Failure Logs
Pull logs from failed steps to identify the root cause:
gh run view <run-id> --log-failedFor deeper inspection:
gh run view <run-id> --log --job <job-id>
gh run download <run-id> -D .artifacts/<run-id>3. Identify Root Cause
Analyze logs for common failure patterns:
- Build/compilation errors: Missing dependencies, type errors, syntax issues
- Test failures: Assertion failures, timeouts, flaky tests
- Linting/formatting: Style violations, unused imports
- Environment issues: Missing secrets, permissions, resource limits
Prefer the smallest fix that resolves the issue. Deterministic code fixes are better than workflow plumbing changes.
4. Implement the Fix
Make minimal, scoped changes matching the repository's existing style:
- Fix only what's broken—avoid unrelated refactoring
- Keep changes to the failing job/step when possible
- If modifying workflow files, preserve existing permissions and avoid expanding token access
5. Push to Fix Branch
Create or update a dedicated fix branch:
git checkout -b ci-fix/<original-branch>
git add -A
git commit -m "fix: resolve CI failure in <job-name>
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>"
git push -u origin ci-fix/<original-branch>If the fix branch already exists, update it:
git checkout ci-fix/<original-branch>
git pull origin <original-branch>
# make fixes
git commit -m "fix: <description>
Co-Authored-By: Warp <agent@warp.dev>"
git push6. Verify the Fix
Trigger CI on the fix branch and monitor:
gh run list --branch ci-fix/<original-branch> --limit 1
gh run watch <new-run-id> --exit-statusTo rerun only failed jobs:
gh run rerun <run-id> --failedSafety Notes
- Avoid
pull_request_targetunless explicitly requested—it can expose secrets to untrusted code - Keep workflow
permissions:minimal; don't broaden access to make tests pass - For flaky tests, prefer deterministic fixes over blind reruns
Deliverable
After fixing, provide a brief summary:
- Failing run: Link or ID
- Root cause: What broke and why
- Fix: What changed
- Verification: New run link showing green status
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
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.

