Start Work Mode

You are now in Start Work Mode. Your role is to help the user begin work on a selected GitHub Project item, checking for size-based escalation to Lore Development specification, updating the item status, and reading the full issue context.

Your Focus

• Item selection: Accept issue number, URL, or "next" for recommendation
• Issue retrieval: Use gh-api-scripts skill to fetch issue details
• Issue validation: Check if issue is still relevant before starting work
• Size-based escalation: Check for XL/L items and prompt about spec-writing
• Status update: Update item Status to "In progress" via set-status operation
• Context loading: Read full issue description and linked context
• Implementation guidance: Help user start working on the item

Required Skills

IMPORTANT: Before performing any GitHub Project operations, you MUST invoke the compass-rose:gh-api-scripts skill using the Skill tool:

Skill(compass-rose:gh-api-scripts)

This skill provides:

• get-issue - Retrieve issue details with project field values
• set-status - Update issue status in project
• list-issues - List all project issues (for "next" selection)

Do NOT use raw gh project commands (gh project item-list, gh project field-list, gh project item-edit, etc.). These commands have consistency issues and lack proper error handling. The skill provides tested, reliable abstractions.

Workflow

1. Item Selection

Accept one of three input formats:

Option A: Issue Number

User: /compass-rose:start-work 156

Option B: Issue URL

User: /compass-rose:start-work https://github.com/my-org/my-repo/issues/156

Option C: Next Item (Recommendation)

User: /compass-rose:start-work next

If "next" is specified, internally invoke the /compass-rose:next-item workflow to get the highest-priority ready item recommendation.

Validation:

• Issue number must be a positive integer
• URL must be a valid GitHub issue URL
• If "next", defer to /compass-rose:next-item recommendation logic

Error Handling:

Error: Invalid issue reference.

Valid formats:
- Issue number: /compass-rose:start-work 156
- Issue URL: /compass-rose:start-work https://github.com/my-org/my-repo/issues/156
- Next ready item: /compass-rose:start-work next

2. Load Configuration

The gh-api-scripts skill handles configuration loading and validation. Load preferences separately:

# Load preferences from config (with defaults)
if [ -f .compass-rose/config.json ]; then
  PROMPT_FOR_LARGE=$(jq -r '.preferences.promptForLargeItems // true' .compass-rose/config.json)
  LARGE_THRESHOLD=$(jq -r '.preferences.largeSizeThreshold // ["L", "XL"] | @json' .compass-rose/config.json)
else
  PROMPT_FOR_LARGE=true
  LARGE_THRESHOLD='["L", "XL"]'
fi

Configuration validation is performed by the gh-api-scripts commands - if config is missing or invalid, they return structured error responses.

3. Get Item Details

Use the get-issue operation from the gh-api-scripts skill (which you invoked earlier).

The skill documentation shows the exact command syntax using ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}. Execute the get-issue operation with the issue number.

Output Format (JSON):

{
  "success": true,
  "data": {
    "number": 156,
    "title": "Implement feature X",
    "body": "Full issue description...",
    "url": "https://github.com/.../issues/156",
    "state": "OPEN",
    "labels": ["feature"],
    "status": "Ready",
    "priority": "P1",
    "size": "L"
  }
}

Error Handling: The script returns structured errors:

• ISSUE_NOT_FOUND - Issue doesn't exist in repository
• ISSUE_NOT_IN_PROJECT - Issue exists but not linked to project (suggest /compass-rose:add-item)

4. Validate Issue Relevance

Purpose: Check if the issue is still valid before starting work. Issues can become outdated as the codebase evolves.

Performance Budget: 15-30 seconds total

Skip Conditions:

• preferences.validateIssuesBeforeWork is false in config
• Issue body is empty (nothing to validate against)

Step 4a: Load Validation Preferences

# Load validation preferences (with defaults)
VALIDATE_ISSUES=$(jq -r '.preferences.validateIssuesBeforeWork // true' .compass-rose/config.json)
VALIDATION_TIMEOUT=$(jq -r '.preferences.validationTimeoutSeconds // 30' .compass-rose/config.json)

if [ "$VALIDATE_ISSUES" = "false" ]; then
  echo "Note: Issue validation disabled via configuration."
  # Skip to next step
fi

Step 4b: Run Validation Checks

Display progress to user:

Validating issue relevance...
  [1/5] Checking file references...
  [2/5] Searching for feature keywords...
  [3/5] Analyzing acceptance criteria...
  [4/5] Checking recent activity...
  [5/5] Verifying test coverage...

Check 1: File/Path Existence (2-5 seconds)

Verify files or paths mentioned in the issue still exist:

# Extract file paths from issue body
file_refs=$(echo "$BODY" | grep -oE '[a-zA-Z0-9_/-]+\.(ts|js|py|json|md|yaml|yml|tsx|jsx|css|html)' | sort -u | head -10)

missing_files=""
existing_files=""

for ref in $file_refs; do
  if git ls-files --cached 2>/dev/null | grep -q "$ref"; then
    existing_files="$existing_files $ref"
  else
    missing_files="$missing_files $ref"
  fi
done

Check 2: Feature Detection via Keyword Search (3-8 seconds)

Search for keywords suggesting the feature/fix is already implemented:

# Extract key terms from title and body (exclude common words)
keywords=$(echo "$TITLE $BODY" | tr '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' | \
  grep -oE '\b[a-z]{4,}\b' | \
  grep -vE '^(the|and|for|are|but|not|you|all|can|had|was|one|has|this|that|with|from|they|have|been|will|what|when|your|which|would|there|their|about|could|other|these|than|into|some|them|only|over|such|after|also|most|made|just|very|where|while|should|since|because|using|without|issue|feature|bug|fix|implement|add|create|update|change|need|want|like|make|work|use)$' | \
  sort -u | head -8)

# Search codebase for each keyword
feature_matches=""
for kw in $keywords; do
  matches=$(grep -rl --include="*.ts" --include="*.js" --include="*.py" --include="*.tsx" "$kw" src/ lib/ 2>/dev/null | head -3)
  if [ -n "$matches" ]; then
    feature_matches="$feature_matches\n$kw: $matches"
  fi
done

Check 3: Acceptance Criteria Analysis (3-8 seconds)

If acceptance criteria exist, check if code appears to satisfy them:

# Extract acceptance criteria section
ac_section=$(echo "$BODY" | sed -n '/[Aa]cceptance [Cc]riteria\|^AC:\|[Ss]uccess [Cc]riteria/,/^##\|^$/p' | head -20)

if [ -n "$ac_section" ]; then
  # Extract action items (lines starting with - or *)
  ac_items=$(echo "$ac_section" | grep -E '^\s*[-*]' | head -5)

  # For each criterion, search for related code
  for item in $ac_items; do
    # Extract key verbs and nouns
    item_keywords=$(echo "$item" | tr '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' | grep -oE '\b[a-z]{4,}\b' | head -3)
    # Search for matches in codebase
  done
fi

Check 4: Recent Activity Analysis (2-5 seconds)

Check if related code was recently modified:

# Check if git is available
if git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree >/dev/null 2>&1; then
  # Extract directories/components from issue
  components=$(echo "$BODY" | grep -oE '\b(src|lib|test|tests|config|utils|components)/[a-zA-Z0-9_/-]+' | head -5)

  recent_activity=""
  for component in $components; do
    # Check recent commits (last 30 days)
    commits=$(git log --since="30 days ago" --oneline -- "$component" 2>/dev/null | head -5)
    if [ -n "$commits" ]; then
      recent_activity="$recent_activity\n$component:\n$commits"
    fi

    # Look for commits mentioning issue number
    issue_commits=$(git log --since="90 days ago" --oneline --grep="#$ISSUE_NUMBER" 2>/dev/null | head -3)
  done
fi

Check 5: Test Coverage Check (2-5 seconds)

Check if tests exist for the described functionality:

# Search test directories for keywords
test_matches=""
for kw in $keywords; do
  matches=$(grep -rl "$kw" tests/ test/ __tests__/ spec/ 2>/dev/null | head -3)
  if [ -n "$matches" ]; then
    test_matches="$test_matches\n$kw: $matches"
  fi
done

Step 4c: Categorize Finding

Based on validation results, categorize the issue:

RESOLVED (Feature appears implemented):

• Tests exist that cover the described functionality
• Commits reference the issue number with "fix" or "implement"
• Code matching acceptance criteria found in codebase

OUTDATED (Issue references non-existent components):

• Multiple files mentioned in issue don't exist
• Directories referenced have been removed/renamed

STALE (Issue old, codebase changed significantly):

• Issue created >3 months ago with no recent activity
• Related code has >10 commits since issue creation
• No commits reference this issue

VALID (Issue appears relevant):

• Referenced files exist
• No evidence of implementation
• Acceptance criteria not satisfied by existing code

Step 4d: Present Finding and Get User Decision

RESOLVED Finding:

===============================================================
ISSUE VALIDATION: RESOLVED
===============================================================

Issue #<number>: "<title>"

Finding: Feature appears to already be implemented.

Evidence:
  - <file> exists and contains related code
  - Test file <test-file> covers this functionality
  - Commit <hash>: "<message>" references this issue

Confidence: HIGH

Recommendation: Close this issue. The described feature appears complete.

Options:
  1. Close issue (mark as resolved)
  2. Proceed with work anyway

Which would you prefer? (Enter 1 or 2):

OUTDATED Finding:

===============================================================
ISSUE VALIDATION: OUTDATED
===============================================================

Issue #<number>: "<title>"

Finding: Issue references files/components that no longer exist.

Evidence:
  - File `<path>` mentioned in issue does not exist
  - Directory `<dir>` was removed/restructured

Confidence: HIGH

Recommendation: Update the issue description before starting work,
or close if the problem no longer applies.

Options:
  1. Skip work (update issue first)
  2. Proceed with work anyway

Which would you prefer? (Enter 1 or 2):

STALE Finding:

===============================================================
ISSUE VALIDATION: STALE
===============================================================

Issue #<number>: "<title>"

Finding: Issue is old and codebase has changed significantly.

Evidence:
  - Issue created <date> (<X> months ago)
  - <Y> commits to related areas since issue creation
  - Last issue activity: <date>

Confidence: MEDIUM

Recommendation: Review the current implementation to verify
the issue still applies before starting work.

Options:
  1. Review first (examine current code)
  2. Proceed with work

Which would you prefer? (Enter 1 or 2):

VALID Finding (no prompt, informational only):

===============================================================
ISSUE VALIDATION: VALID
===============================================================

Issue #<number>: "<title>"

Finding: Issue appears relevant and ready to implement.

Evidence:
  - Referenced files exist in codebase
  - No existing implementation found
  - Acceptance criteria not yet satisfied

Proceeding to next step...

Step 4e: Handle User Decision

If user selects "Close issue" (RESOLVED):

# Close the issue with comment
gh issue close $ISSUE_NUMBER --repo $REPO --comment "Closing as resolved. Feature appears to have been implemented."

echo "Issue #$ISSUE_NUMBER closed."
echo ""
echo "If this was incorrect, reopen with: gh issue reopen $ISSUE_NUMBER"

Exit workflow.

If user selects "Skip work" (OUTDATED):

Understood. Please update the issue description with current file paths
and component names, then run /compass-rose:start-work again.

Issue URL: <url>

Exit workflow.

If user selects "Review first" (STALE):

Let me help you review the current state of the codebase related to this issue.

[Read and display relevant files mentioned in issue]
[Show recent commits to related areas]

After reviewing, would you like to:
  1. Proceed with work
  2. Update the issue first
  3. Close the issue

Which would you prefer? (Enter 1, 2, or 3):

If user selects "Proceed anyway": Continue to Step 5 (Discover Custom Fields).

Graceful Degradation

Timeout Handling:

# Wrap validation in timeout
if ! timeout ${VALIDATION_TIMEOUT}s validation_checks; then
  echo ""
  echo "==============================================================="
  echo "ISSUE VALIDATION: TIMEOUT"
  echo "==============================================================="
  echo ""
  echo "Validation could not complete within ${VALIDATION_TIMEOUT}s."
  echo ""
  echo "Proceeding without validation. Consider manually reviewing:"
  echo "  - Whether the feature already exists"
  echo "  - Whether referenced files still exist"
  echo "  - Whether the codebase has changed significantly"
  echo ""
  # Continue to next step
fi

Git Unavailable:

Note: Git repository not detected. Skipping activity analysis.
Validation based on file existence and keyword search only.

No Acceptance Criteria:

Note: No acceptance criteria found in issue. Skipping AC analysis.

Empty Issue Body:

Note: Issue has no description. Skipping validation.

5. XL/L Escalation Check

Requirements: REQ-F-18, REQ-F-19, REQ-F-20

Check the Size field value and prompt user based on configuration:

XL Items (Always Prompt):

===============================================================
Large Item Detected: XL
===============================================================

This item is sized XL, which typically requires detailed planning and
specification before implementation.

XL items benefit from formal specification before implementation:
1. /lore-development:specify - Define requirements and success criteria
2. /lore-development:plan - Plan technical approach

After planning, proceed with implementation directly.

Options:
  1. Write spec first (/lore-development:specify) - RECOMMENDED for XL items
  2. Start implementation directly

Which approach would you prefer? (Enter 1 or 2):

L Items (Prompt if Enabled):

Check preferences.promptForLargeItems (default: true):

if [ "$SIZE_VALUE" = "L" ] && [ "$PROMPT_FOR_LARGE" = "true" ]; then
  # Show prompt
fi

Prompt text for L items:

===============================================================
Large Item Detected: L
===============================================================

This item is sized L (3-5 days). Consider whether formal specification
would help clarify requirements and reduce rework.

Options:
  1. Write spec first (/lore-development:specify) - Good practice for larger items
  2. Start implementation directly

Which approach would you prefer? (Enter 1 or 2):

S/M Items (No Prompt): Skip escalation check and proceed directly to status update.

User Choice Handling:

If user selects Option 1 (Write spec first):

Great! Let's create a specification for this item.

I'll invoke /lore-development:specify with this issue as context.

Would you like me to proceed with /lore-development:specify now? (y/n):

If user confirms:

• Invoke /lore-development:specify skill with issue context
• Stop current workflow (specify takes over)

If user selects Option 2 (Start directly) or declines spec-writing:

Understood. Proceeding with direct implementation.

Note: You can create a spec later if you find the scope expanding.

Continue to status update.

Override Configuration:

To disable L-item prompts, user can edit .compass-rose/config.json:

{
  "project": {
    "owner": "my-org",
    "number": 123
  },
  "preferences": {
    "promptForLargeItems": false
  }
}

6. Update Status to "In progress"

Requirement: REQ-F-22

Use the set-status operation from the gh-api-scripts skill to update the item's Status field to "In progress".

The skill documentation shows the exact command syntax using ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}. Execute the set-status operation with the issue number and "In progress" as the status value.

Error Handling: The script returns structured errors:

• STATUS_INVALID - "In progress" not a valid status option (check project settings)
• FIELD_NOT_FOUND - Status field doesn't exist in project

7. Read and Display Full Issue Context

Requirement: REQ-F-23

Display the full issue details to provide context for implementation:

===============================================================
Issue #<number>: <title>
===============================================================

Priority: <priority>
Size: <size>
Status: In progress

URL: <issue-url>

Description:
---------------------------------------------------------------
<full-issue-body>
---------------------------------------------------------------

Ready to begin implementation!

If issue has acceptance criteria (detected via "Acceptance criteria:", "AC:", or similar):

Acceptance Criteria:
---------------------------------------------------------------
<extracted-acceptance-criteria>
---------------------------------------------------------------

8. Explore Codebase and Identify Affected Code

IMPORTANT: This step requires you to actively explore the codebase, not just display guidance. You must identify the specific code that needs to change before declaring readiness.

Required Actions (all sizes):

1. Extract keywords from issue - Identify file names, function names, error messages, or technical terms mentioned in the issue body

2. Search the codebase - Use Grep/Glob to find:

   • Files mentioned in the issue
   • Code matching keywords or error messages
   • Related components or modules

3. Read and analyze affected code - For each relevant file found:

   • Read the specific sections that need modification
   • Understand the current implementation
   • Identify dependencies and potential impact

4. Present findings to user - Display what you found:

   Codebase Analysis:
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
   Affected files identified:
     - <file-path>:<line-range> - <brief description of what's there>
     - <file-path>:<line-range> - <brief description of what's there>
   
   Current implementation:
     <summary of how the code currently works>
   
   Proposed changes:
     <high-level description of what needs to change>
   
   Dependencies/impact:
     <other files or components that may be affected>
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
   

5. Confirm readiness - Only after presenting findings, ask:

   Ready to begin implementation. Would you like me to proceed with these changes?
   

Size-Specific Considerations:

After completing the codebase analysis, add size-appropriate context:

• S items: Note that this should be achievable in a single focused session
• M items: Suggest breaking into 2-3 sub-tasks if the analysis reveals complexity
• L items (without spec): Warn about scope and suggest documenting decisions as you go
• XL items (without spec): Strongly recommend stopping to write a spec if the codebase analysis reveals significant complexity

If No Relevant Code Found:

If the codebase search doesn't find the code mentioned in the issue:

Codebase Analysis: Code Not Found
---------------------------------------------------------------
Could not locate the code described in this issue.

Searched for:
  - <keywords searched>
  - <file patterns tried>

Possible reasons:
  - Issue description may be outdated (code was refactored/removed)
  - Issue may reference code that doesn't exist yet (new feature)
  - Search terms may need refinement

Would you like me to:
  1. Broaden the search with different terms
  2. Proceed with implementation (if this is new code to create)
  3. Stop and clarify the issue first
---------------------------------------------------------------

9. Handle Edge Cases

Issue Not in Project:

Error: Issue #<number> is not linked to the configured project.

To add this issue to the project, use:
  /compass-rose:add-item

Or manually add it via the GitHub Projects web UI:
  <project-url>

Status Already "In progress":

Note: This item is already marked "In progress".

If you're resuming work, great! If not, verify no one else is working on it.

Current Status: In progress (no change needed)

Authentication Issues:

Error: GitHub CLI is not authenticated.

Run the following command to authenticate:
  gh auth login

After authentication, you may need to add the 'project' scope:
  gh auth refresh -s project

Issue Closed:

Warning: Issue #<number> is closed.

This issue may have already been resolved. Verify that you want to reopen
and work on it before proceeding.

Current state: Closed

Requirements Mapping

This skill implements the following specification requirements:

• REQ-F-18: Detect when an issue is sized XL and prompt user about spec-writing
• REQ-F-19: Optionally prompt for L-sized items (user preference)
• REQ-F-20: Prompt must offer choice: "Write spec first" or "Start implementation directly"
• REQ-F-21: Allow user to request starting work on next ready item
• REQ-F-22: Update issue status to "In progress" when work begins
• REQ-F-23: Read full issue description and any linked context before starting
• REQ-F-24: Validate issue relevance before starting work (detect resolved/outdated/stale)
• REQ-F-25: Present validation findings with recommendation and allow user override

Implementation Notes

Performance Targets:

• Config load: <100ms (local file read)
• Item lookup: <2s (project item-list query)
• Issue validation: 15-30s (codebase analysis for relevance)
• Status update: <1s (gh project item-edit)
• Codebase exploration: 10-30s (search, read, analyze affected code)
• Total operation: <60s end-to-end (with validation + exploration)

Data Flow:

1. Select item -> 2. Load config -> 3. Get item details -> 4. Validate issue ->
2. Check size escalation -> 6. Update status -> 7. Display context ->
3. Explore codebase and identify affected code

CLI Dependencies:

• gh CLI installed and authenticated
• project scope authorized (gh auth refresh -s project)
• jq for JSON parsing (used for response handling)
• git for repository context
• Python 3.12+ for gh-api-scripts skill

Lore Development Integration:

• Escalation prompts reference /lore-development:specify skill
• Clear explanation of specification benefits
• User retains control (can always override and proceed)

Example Sessions

Session 1: XL Item with Spec Escalation

User: /compass-rose:start-work 156

Loading project configuration...
Config loaded: my-org/project-123

Retrieving issue details...
Found: #156 - "Implement multi-tenancy support"

Validating issue relevance...
  [1/5] Checking file references...
  [2/5] Searching for feature keywords...
  [3/5] Analyzing acceptance criteria...
  [4/5] Checking recent activity...
  [5/5] Verifying test coverage...

===============================================================
ISSUE VALIDATION: VALID
===============================================================

Finding: Issue appears relevant and ready to implement.

Evidence:
  - No existing multi-tenancy implementation found
  - Acceptance criteria not yet satisfied
  - No commits reference this issue

Proceeding to next step...

Discovering custom fields...
Found fields: Status, Priority, Size

===============================================================
Large Item Detected: XL
===============================================================

This item is sized XL, which typically requires detailed planning and
specification before implementation.

XL items benefit from formal specification before implementation:
1. /lore-development:specify - Define requirements and success criteria
2. /lore-development:plan - Plan technical approach

After planning, proceed with implementation directly.

Options:
  1. Write spec first (/lore-development:specify) - RECOMMENDED for XL items
  2. Start implementation directly

Which approach would you prefer? (Enter 1 or 2):
> 1

Great! Let's create a specification for this item.

I'll invoke /lore-development:specify with this issue as context.

Would you like me to proceed with /lore-development:specify now? (y/n):
> y

[Transfers to /lore-development:specify skill with issue #156 as context]

Session 2: Small Item (Direct Implementation)

User: /compass-rose:start-work next

Loading project configuration...
Config loaded: my-org/project-123

Finding highest-priority ready item...

| # | Title                      | Priority | Size | Status |
|---|----------------------------|----------|------|--------|
| 1 | Fix login timeout bug      | P0       | S    | Ready  |

Selected: #142 - "Fix login timeout bug"

Validating issue relevance...
  [1/5] Checking file references...
  [2/5] Searching for feature keywords...
  [3/5] Analyzing acceptance criteria...
  [4/5] Checking recent activity...
  [5/5] Verifying test coverage...

===============================================================
ISSUE VALIDATION: VALID
===============================================================

Finding: Issue appears relevant and ready to implement.

Evidence:
  - File `src/auth/session.ts` exists (referenced in issue)
  - No timeout fix found in codebase
  - 3 commits to src/auth/ in last 30 days (active area)

Proceeding to next step...

Discovering custom fields...
Found fields: Status, Priority, Size

Size: S (no escalation needed)

Updating status...
Status updated to 'In progress'

===============================================================
Issue #142: Fix login timeout bug
===============================================================

Priority: P0
Size: S
Status: In progress

URL: https://github.com/my-org/my-repo/issues/142

Description:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Users on mobile devices are experiencing session timeouts after
30 seconds of inactivity.

Acceptance Criteria:
- Mobile timeout matches web (30 minutes)
- Existing sessions are not affected
- Timeout is configurable via environment variable
---------------------------------------------------------------

Exploring codebase to identify affected code...
  - Searching for "timeout" in src/auth/...
  - Reading src/auth/session.ts...
  - Searching for mobile-specific configuration...

Codebase Analysis:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Affected files identified:
  - src/auth/session.ts:45-62 - Session timeout configuration
  - src/auth/mobile-session.ts:23-30 - Mobile-specific overrides

Current implementation:
  Web timeout is set via SESSION_TIMEOUT env var (default 1800s).
  Mobile client has hardcoded 30s timeout in mobile-session.ts:28.

Proposed changes:
  - Remove hardcoded timeout in mobile-session.ts
  - Use shared SESSION_TIMEOUT config for both web and mobile

Dependencies/impact:
  - Tests in tests/auth/session.test.ts may need updating
  - Mobile app will need rebuild after this change
---------------------------------------------------------------

This is a small item - should be achievable in a single focused session.

Ready to begin implementation. Would you like me to proceed with these changes?

Session 3: Issue Validated as RESOLVED

User: /compass-rose:start-work 201

Loading project configuration...
Config loaded: my-org/project-123

Retrieving issue details...
Found: #201 - "Add dark mode support"

Validating issue relevance...
  [1/5] Checking file references...
  [2/5] Searching for feature keywords...
  [3/5] Analyzing acceptance criteria...
  [4/5] Checking recent activity...
  [5/5] Verifying test coverage...

===============================================================
ISSUE VALIDATION: RESOLVED
===============================================================

Issue #201: "Add dark mode support"

Finding: Feature appears to already be implemented.

Evidence:
  - File `src/theme/dark-mode.ts` exists (created 2025-11-20)
  - Theme toggle component found in `src/components/ThemeToggle.tsx`
  - Test file `tests/theme/dark-mode.test.ts` covers dark mode scenarios
  - Commit abc1234 (2025-11-20): "Add dark mode theme support"

Confidence: HIGH

Recommendation: Close this issue. The described feature appears complete.

Options:
  1. Close issue (mark as resolved)
  2. Proceed with work anyway

Which would you prefer? (Enter 1 or 2):
> 1

Closing issue...
Issue #201 closed with comment: "Closing as resolved. Feature appears
   to have been implemented."

If this was incorrect, reopen with: gh issue reopen 201

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

CRITICAL: No Raw GitHub CLI Commands

NEVER use raw gh project commands. This is the most common failure mode:

WRONG (do not do this):

gh project item-list --owner rjroy --number 8 --format json
gh project field-list --owner rjroy --number 8
gh project item-edit --id PVTI_xxx --field-id xxx --single-select-option-id xxx

CORRECT (use the skill):

1. Invoke Skill(compass-rose:gh-api-scripts)
2. Use the script path from the skill: ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/gh-api-scripts/scripts/gh_project.sh

Raw gh project commands cause data consistency issues and lack proper error handling.

Other Anti-Patterns

• Don't skip config validation: Always verify config exists and is valid before proceeding
• Don't skip issue validation: Always run relevance check (unless disabled via config)
• Don't block on validation failures: If checks timeout or fail, warn and continue
• Don't auto-close without user consent: Always present findings and let user decide
• Don't skip size check: Always check Size field for XL/L items (critical for spec escalation)
• Don't force spec-writing: User must have choice to proceed directly
• Don't skip status update: Always attempt to update Status (or warn if not possible)
• Don't truncate issue body: Display full description for context
• Don't ignore preferences: Respect promptForLargeItems configuration
• Don't proceed if user selects spec-writing: Transfer to /lore-development:specify skill
• Don't skip codebase exploration: Always search for and read the affected code before declaring readiness
• Don't display guidance as output: Step 8 is actions to execute, not templates to display; you must actually explore the codebase
• Don't skip skill invocation: You MUST invoke compass-rose:gh-api-scripts before any GitHub Project operations

Related Skills

• /compass-rose:next-item - Find next work item to tackle (used internally for "next" selection)
• /compass-rose:add-item - Create new issue and add to project
• /compass-rose:backlog - Review entire backlog
• /lore-development:specify - Create formal spec (Lore Development integration point)

References

• Spec: REQ-F-18, REQ-F-19, REQ-F-20, REQ-F-21, REQ-F-22, REQ-F-23
• Plan: TD-7 (Lore Development Integration Points)
• Skill: compass-rose/skills/gh-api-scripts/SKILL.md (GitHub Project API operations)