analyse

<objective>

Analyze GitHub issues and PRs to help maintainers triage, respond, and decide quickly. Produces actionable, structured output — not just summaries.

</objective> <inputs>

• $ARGUMENTS: one of:
  • Number (e.g. 42) — auto-detects issue vs PR
  • health — generate repo issue/PR health overview
  • dupes [keyword] — find potential duplicate issues
  • contributors — top contributor activity and release cadence
  • ecosystem — downstream consumer impact analysis for library maintainers

</inputs> <workflow>

Auto-Detection (for numeric arguments)

When $ARGUMENTS is a number, determine whether it is an issue or a PR before routing. Default assumption: issue — this skill is primarily for issue analysis.

# GitHub's issues API covers both issues and PRs.
# A PR has a "pull_request" key; a plain issue does not.
TYPE=$(gh api "repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/$ARGUMENTS" \
  --jq 'if .pull_request then "pr" else "issue" end' 2>/dev/null || echo "issue")

if [ "$TYPE" = "pr" ]; then
  # → Route to PR Analysis mode
else
  # → Route to Issue Analysis mode
fi

Mode: Issue Analysis

# Fetch issue details
gh issue view $ARGUMENTS --json number,title,body,labels,comments,createdAt,author,state

# Fetch all comments
gh issue view $ARGUMENTS --comments

Produce:

## Issue #[number]: [title]

**State**: [open/closed] | **Author**: @[author] | **Age**: [X days]
**Labels**: [current labels]

### Summary
[2-3 sentence plain-language summary of the issue]

### Thread Verdict
[If thread contains a verified/confirmed solution: extract it here with attribution]
[If no verified solution: "No confirmed solution in thread." — skip thread detail]

### Root Cause Hypotheses

| # | Hypothesis | Probability | Reasoning |
|---|-----------|-------------|-----------|
| 1 | [most likely cause] | [high/medium/low] | [why — reference specific code paths] |
| 2 | [alternative cause] | [medium/low] | [why] |
| 3 | [less likely] | [low] | [why] |

### Code Evidence

For the top hypothesis, trace through relevant code:

```[language]
# [file:line] — [what this code does and why it relates to the hypothesis]
[relevant code snippet]
```

### Suggested Labels

[labels to add/remove based on analysis]

### Suggested Response

[draft reply — or "close as duplicate of #X"]

[Use Markdown formatting: wrap function/class/method names in backticks (`func_name`), wrap code samples in fenced blocks with language tag]

### Priority

[Critical / High / Medium / Low] — [rationale]

After printing the output above, write the full content to tasks/output-analyse-issue-$ARGUMENTS-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md using the Write tool and notify: → saved to tasks/output-analyse-issue-$ARGUMENTS-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md

Mode: PR Analysis

Run all three gh commands in parallel — they are independent API calls:

# --- run these three in parallel ---

# PR metadata
gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --json number,title,body,labels,reviews,statusCheckRollup,files,additions,deletions,commits,author

# CI status
gh pr checks $ARGUMENTS

# Files changed
gh pr diff $ARGUMENTS --name-only

Produce:

## PR #[number]: [title]

**Author**: @[author] | **Size**: +[additions]/-[deletions] lines, [N] files
**CI**: [passing/failing/pending]

### Recommendation
[🟢 Approve / 🟡 Minor Suggestions / 🟠 Request Changes / 🔴 Block] — [one-sentence justification]

### Completeness
_Legend: ✅ present · ⚠️ partial · ❌ missing · 🔵 N/A_
- [✅/⚠️/❌/🔵] Clear description of what changed and why
- [✅/⚠️/❌/🔵] Linked to a related issue (`Fixes #NNN` or `Relates to #NNN`)
- [✅/⚠️/❌/🔵] Tests added/updated (happy path, failure path, edge cases)
- [✅/⚠️/❌/🔵] Docstrings (NumPy or Google style, consistent with project) for all new/changed public APIs
- [✅/⚠️/❌/🔵] No secrets or credentials introduced
- [✅/⚠️/❌/🔵] Linting and CI checks pass

### Quality Scores
- Code: n/5 [emoji] — [reason]
- Testing: n/5 [emoji] — [reason]
- Documentation: n/5 [emoji] — [reason]

### Risk: n/5 [emoji] — [brief description]
- Breaking changes: [none / detail]
- Performance: [none / detail]
- Security: [none / detail]
- Compatibility: [none / detail]

### Must Fix
1. [blocking issue]

### Suggestions (non-blocking)
1. [improvement]

### Next Steps
1. [clear action for the author]

After printing the output above, write the full content to tasks/output-analyse-pr-$ARGUMENTS-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md using the Write tool and notify: → saved to tasks/output-analyse-pr-$ARGUMENTS-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md

Mode: Repo Health Overview

Run all three gh commands in parallel — they are independent API calls:

# --- run these three in parallel ---

# Open issues count and age distribution
gh issue list --state open --json number,createdAt,labels --limit 200

# Stale issues (no activity > 90 days)
gh issue list --state open --json number,title,updatedAt --limit 200 | \
  jq '[.[] | select(.updatedAt < (now - 7776000 | todate))]'

# Open PRs
gh pr list --state open --json number,title,createdAt,reviews,statusCheckRollup

Produce:

## Repo Health: [repo]

### Issue Summary
- Open issues: [N]
- Stale (>90 days): [N] — [list top 5]
- Needs triage (no labels): [N]
- Bugs: [N] | Enhancements: [N] | Questions: [N]

### PR Summary
- Open PRs: [N]
- Awaiting review: [N]
- CI failing: [N]
- Stale (>30 days): [N]

### Recommended Actions
1. [most urgent triage action]
2. [second]
3. [third]

After printing the output above, write the full content to tasks/output-analyse-health-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md using the Write tool and notify: → saved to tasks/output-analyse-health-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md

Mode: Duplicate Detection

# Search existing issues for keyword
gh issue list --state all --search "$ARGUMENTS" --json number,title,state --limit 50

Group by similarity and output:

## Potential Duplicates for: "[keyword]"

### Group 1: [theme]
- #[N]: [title] ([state])
- #[N]: [title] ([state])
Canonical: #[oldest open issue] — suggest closing others as duplicates

### Unique (not duplicates)
- #[N]: [title] — [why it's distinct]

After printing the output above, write the full content to tasks/output-analyse-dupes-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md using the Write tool and notify: → saved to tasks/output-analyse-dupes-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md

Mode: Contributor Activity

# Top contributors in last 90 days
gh api "repos/{owner}/{repo}/stats/contributors" \
  | jq '[.[] | {author: .author.login, commits: .total, last_week: .weeks[-1]}] | sort_by(-.commits) | .[:10]'

# Release cadence
gh release list --limit 20 --json tagName,publishedAt \
  | jq '[.[] | .publishedAt[:10]]'

Produce:

## Contributor Activity: [repo]

### Top Contributors (90 days)
| Author | Commits | Trend |
|--------|---------|-------|
| @... | N | ... |

### Release Cadence
- Average: [N days] between releases
- Last release: [date] ([tag])
- Overdue? [yes/no based on cadence]

After printing the output above, write the full content to tasks/output-analyse-contributors-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md using the Write tool and notify: → saved to tasks/output-analyse-contributors-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md

Mode: Ecosystem Impact (for library maintainers)

When assessing the impact of a change on downstream users:

# Find downstream dependents on GitHub
gh api "search/code" --field "q=from mypackage import language:python" \
  --jq '[.items[].repository.full_name] | unique | .[]'

# Check PyPI reverse dependencies (who depends on us?)
# Requires johnnydep: pip install johnnydep (not installed by default — skip if unavailable)
# johnnydep mypackage --fields=name --reverse 2>/dev/null || echo "johnnydep not available — skipping PyPI reverse deps"

# Check conda-forge feedstock dependents
gh api "search/code" --field "q=mypackage repo:conda-forge/*-feedstock filename:meta.yaml" \
  --jq '[.items[].repository.full_name] | .[]'

Produce:

## Ecosystem Impact: [change description]

### Downstream Consumers Found
- [repo]: uses [specific API being changed]

### Breaking Risk
- [High/Medium/Low] — [N] known consumers of changed API
- Migration path: [available / needs documentation]

### Recommended Communication
- [create migration guide / add deprecation warning / notify maintainers directly]

After printing the output above, write the full content to tasks/output-analyse-ecosystem-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md using the Write tool and notify: → saved to tasks/output-analyse-ecosystem-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md

End your response with a ## Confidence block per CLAUDE.md output standards.

</workflow> <notes>

• This skill uses mode dispatch (## Mode: X sections) rather than sequential numbered steps — each mode is self-contained
• Always use gh CLI — never hardcode repo URLs
• Run gh auth status first if commands fail; user may need to authenticate
• For closed issues/PRs, note the resolution so history is useful
• Don't post responses without explicit user instruction — only draft them
• Follow-up chains:
  • Issue with confirmed bug → /fix to diagnose, reproduce with test, and apply targeted fix
  • Issue is a feature request → /feature for TDD-first implementation
  • Issue with code smell or structural problem → /refactor for test-first improvements
  • PR with quality concerns → /review for comprehensive multi-agent code review

</notes>