feat: add triage-findings agent skill and documentation for issue resolution workflow
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: triage-findings
|
||||
description: Merge code-review findings, sort and renumber them by severity, resolve real issues, and move false positives into exclusions.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Triage Findings
|
||||
|
||||
## When To Use
|
||||
|
||||
Use this skill when you receive multiple review findings, screenshots, comments, or issue lists that need to become one final triaged list.
|
||||
It is also used when some findings are false positives and should be moved into the exclusions list.
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
1. Collect all findings into one list.
|
||||
2. Merge duplicates into a single finding when they describe the same issue.
|
||||
3. Sort the final list by severity:
|
||||
- critical
|
||||
- warning
|
||||
- info
|
||||
4. Renumber the sorted list from 1 upward.
|
||||
5. Rewrite each finding concisely so the final list reads cleanly and consistently.
|
||||
6. If a finding is a false positive, do not keep it in the final list.
|
||||
7. Add false positives to the exclusions list as a top-level JSON array in `.gitea/ai-review/exclusions.json`, and preserve the original finding wording as much as possible, including language and semantics. Do not wrap the array in `exclusions` or `excluded_findings`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Resolution Flow
|
||||
|
||||
After the list is merged and ordered, resolve the remaining findings one by one.
|
||||
|
||||
1. Start from the highest severity item.
|
||||
2. Identify the root cause in the relevant file or context.
|
||||
3. Apply the smallest safe change that fixes the issue.
|
||||
4. Add or update tests when behavior changes.
|
||||
5. Re-check the issue after the change.
|
||||
6. If the item is confirmed false positive, move it to exclusions instead of changing code.
|
||||
7. Continue until the list is either fixed or explicitly excluded.
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Rules
|
||||
|
||||
- Keep the final findings list in severity order, then by any stable secondary order needed to make it readable.
|
||||
- Keep numbering contiguous after filtering and merging.
|
||||
- Preserve useful details like file path, location, and suggested fix.
|
||||
- Keep exclusions entries minimal and consistent with the project schema.
|
||||
- When writing exclusions, always output a top-level JSON array.
|
||||
- When writing exclusions, prefer the original issue text and language; only paraphrase if needed to fit the schema.
|
||||
- If the source already provides a severity or title, keep it unless it conflicts with the final ordering.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
|
||||
# Triage Findings
|
||||
|
||||
When the task is to triage review findings, follow this workflow:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Merge all findings into one list.
|
||||
2. Remove duplicates.
|
||||
3. Sort by severity: `critical` -> `warning` -> `info`.
|
||||
4. Renumber from 1 after sorting.
|
||||
5. Fix real issues with the smallest safe change.
|
||||
6. Add false positives to `.gitea/ai-review/exclusions.json`, preserving the original wording, language, and semantics as much as possible.
|
||||
7. Add or update tests when behavior changes.
|
||||
8. Re-check the issue after each fix.
|
||||
|
||||
Use the repo-local `triage-findings` skill for the same workflow when running in Codex.
|
||||
|
||||
Trigger it with `/triage-findings`.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user