analyse-issue

Original：🇺🇸 English

Translated

Analyze GitHub issues by link or issue number. Use when a user says "analyse issue"/"analyze issue" or provides a GitHub issue URL/number and asks to fetch the issue content, verify it matches the current repo, and inspect local code to confirm the problem.

1installs

Sourcetenfyzhong/skills-hub

Added on2026-02-10

NPX Install

npx skill4agent add tenfyzhong/skills-hub analyse-issue

SKILL.md Content

View Translation Comparison →

Analyse Issue

Overview

Fetch the issue details, verify repo alignment, and inspect the local codebase to confirm or refute the reported problem. Provide an evidence-backed analysis with clear next steps.

Workflow

1) Parse the issue input

If input is a GitHub issue URL, extract owner/repo and issue number.
If input is just a number, assume the current repo unless the user specifies another repo.
If the provider is not GitHub or is unclear, ask for clarification before proceeding.

2) Verify local repo matches the issue

Ensure the current directory is inside a git repo (
```
git rev-parse --show-toplevel
```
).
Identify the target remote (prefer
```
origin
```
); normalize SSH/HTTPS to
```
owner/repo
```
.
If the issue URL repo does not match the local
```
owner/repo
```
, stop and ask the user to switch directories or confirm the target repo.
If no remote or multiple candidates exist, ask the user which repo to use.

3) Fetch issue content

Prefer

gh

when available:

gh issue view <num> --json title,body,labels,comments,author,createdAt,updatedAt

If URL provided, run against that repo:

gh issue view <num> -R owner/repo --json ...

Fallbacks:

gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{num}

and

.../comments

if you need more fields.

If
```
gh
```
is unavailable but
```
GITHUB_TOKEN
```
exists, use
```
curl
```
with the GitHub API.
If neither works, ask the user to paste the issue content.

Capture at least: title, body, labels, environment details, repro steps, expected/actual behavior, and key comment insights.

4) Analyze the codebase

Translate the issue into concrete signals (keywords, error messages, stack traces, config names).
Use
```
rg
```
to locate relevant code, tests, and configs.
Trace the execution path: entry points -> core logic -> dependencies.
Identify likely failure points: missing checks, edge cases, incorrect assumptions, data shape mismatches, concurrency/timing issues.
If appropriate and safe, run focused tests; otherwise propose targeted tests to validate the hypothesis.

5) Confirm or qualify the issue

Provide evidence with file references and reasoning.
If you can only reason without running tests, state assumptions and confidence.
If evidence is insufficient, list the exact missing info needed.

6) Respond with a structured analysis

Include:

Issue summary (expected vs actual)
Repo match verification
Evidence (files/functions)
Root-cause hypothesis or confirmed cause
Suggested fix approach
Questions or missing data
Next steps (tests, logs, repro)

Output conventions

Respond in the user's language when clear; default to Chinese for Chinese prompts.
Keep analysis concise but include concrete file pointers and evidence.
Do not claim confirmation without code-based evidence or reproduction.