olshansk/agent-skills

cmd-gh-issue

Create structured GitHub issues from conversation context using gh CLI

First seen Mar 8, 2026

Installation

$ npx skills add olshansk/agent-skills --skill cmd-gh-issue

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from olshansk/agent-skills · top by installs.

npx skills add olshansk/agent-skills

Browse all from olshansk/agent-skills

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 8
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 0
Status Active

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 3,463 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 90 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 15 installs

SKILL.md

Create GitHub Issue from Conversation

Create a well-structured GitHub issue using gh CLI, populated with context from the current conversation.

Instructions

  1. Determine the repo -- confirm you're inside a git repo with a GitHub remote:

``bash gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q '.nameWithOwner' ``

If this fails, ask the user which repo to file against.

  1. Synthesize the conversation into a GitHub issue body following the structure below.
  1. Create the issue using gh:

``bash gh issue create --title "<concise title>" --body "$(cat <<'ISSUEEOF' <issue body here> ISSUEEOF )" ``

  1. Report back with the issue URL.

Issue Body Structure

Build the issue body in this exact order:

Section 1: What & Why

Open with a short (2-4 bullet) summary answering:

  • What needs to happen?
  • Why does it matter? (user pain, system constraint, business goal)

This section should stand alone -- a reader who stops here should understand the ask.

Section 2: Context & Discussion

This is the bulk of the issue. Capture everything relevant from our conversation:

  • Background -- what led to this discussion
  • Current behavior -- how things work today (or don't)
  • Desired behavior -- what success looks like
  • Constraints & decisions -- trade-offs we discussed, options we rejected and why
  • Technical details -- relevant code paths, configs, schemas, API shapes, error messages
  • Related work -- links to PRs, issues, docs, or external references mentioned

Formatting rules for this section:

  • Use ## Headings and ### Subheadings to organize by topic
  • Use bullet points over paragraphs
  • Use markdown tables for comparisons, option matrices, or structured data
  • Embed images/screenshots if any were shared (use ![alt](url) syntax)
  • Wrap code snippets, commands, file paths, and config in fenced code blocks with language tags
  • Use <details><summary>...</summary>...</details> to collapse verbose content (logs, full configs, large code blocks) so the issue stays scannable
  • Do NOT strip context -- preserve the substance of our discussion, but reorganize it logically

Section 3: Implementation Plan

End with the plan we've aligned on (even if rough). Frame it for a future agent or developer picking this up cold:

  • Number the steps
  • Call out key files to create or modify
  • Note any open questions or decisions still TBD (prefix with [ ])
  • If there are dependencies between steps, make the order explicit
  • If we haven't aligned on a plan yet, write ## Implementation Plan\n\nTBD -- no plan agreed on yet.

Labels & Assignment (optional)

  • If the conversation implies a category (bug, feature, enhancement, tech-debt), add --label flags
  • Do NOT assign unless the user explicitly asks

Style Rules

  • Title: imperative mood, under 70 chars (e.g., "Add retry logic to webhook delivery")
  • No fluff: skip filler phrases like "It would be great if..." -- be direct
  • Bias to structure: headers > paragraphs, bullets > prose, tables > lists-of-pairs
  • Preserve signal: don't summarize away details that a future implementer would need
  • Mark uncertainty: if something was discussed but not decided, say so explicitly with "TBD" or an open checkbox [ ]