5 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Matt Pocock b843cb5ea7 Add structured sections for 'what-to-do' and 'supporting-info' in SKILL.md
Co-authored-by: Copilot <copilot@github.com>
2026-04-30 12:38:11 +01:00
Matt Pocock 839025ae17 Remove disable-model-invocation flag from grill-with-docs 2026-04-30 11:46:00 +01:00
Matt Pocock 3dae2b1945 Add verify/check mode documentation and list-skills script 2026-04-30 10:12:35 +01:00
Matt Pocock f71bb975bf Add out-of-scope note: issue trackers must be mainstream
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-29 10:56:28 +01:00
Matt Pocock 4369256220 Add GitLab as a first-class issue-tracker option
Closes #98

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-29 08:21:19 +01:00
6 changed files with 83 additions and 4 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Issue tracker integrations are limited to mainstream tools
`setup-matt-pocock-skills` only offers first-class support for **mainstream** issue trackers. Requests to add support for niche, new, or single-vendor experimental trackers are out of scope.
## Why this is out of scope
Every issue-tracker backend hard-codes a CLI shape into the skills (commands, flags, output parsing). Each new backend is permanent maintenance surface — it has to keep working as the tool's CLI evolves, and it has to keep being tested against `/to-prd`, `/to-issues`, `/triage`, and friends. That cost is only worth paying for trackers a meaningful fraction of users actually have.
"Mainstream" is a judgment call, not a numeric bar:
- GitHub, GitLab, and Backlog.md are the kind of tools we'd consider mainstream — broadly known, widely used, well past the experimental phase.
- A brand-new agent-focused tool with a few hundred GitHub stars is not, no matter how interesting the design.
Stars, age, and download counts are useful signals when making the call but none of them is the rule. The rule is: would a typical engineer recognise this tool and have plausibly chosen it for their team?
The escape hatches for non-mainstream trackers already exist:
- `local markdown` for lightweight in-repo tracking.
- `other/custom` for users who want to wire something up themselves.
Neither requires the core skills to know about the specific tool.
## Prior requests
- #99 — "Add dex as an issue tracker backend" (dex was ~3 months old and ~300 stars at the time of the request)
+15
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
# Verify/Check Mode for `setup-matt-pocock-skills`
This project will not add a dedicated verify/check mode (or a separate verify skill) for `setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
## Why this is out of scope
A second skill — or a `--verify` flag — for checking whether `docs/agents/*.md` artifacts still match the seed-template schema would duplicate work the existing setup skill already handles in conversation.
The intended workflow is: **run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` and tell it to verify your current setup.** The skill is prompt-driven, so the maintainer can scope it to a verification pass ("don't rewrite anything, just check my existing files against the current seed templates and report drift") without needing a separate code path. Adding a flag or a sibling skill would split the surface area of a feature that's already expressible through the natural-language entry point.
Keeping configuration management to a single skill also avoids the maintenance cost of two skills drifting from each other when seed templates evolve.
## Prior requests
- #106 — Feature request: verify/check mode for setup-matt-pocock-skills
+7
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
#!/usr/bin/env bash
set -euo pipefail
REPO="$(cd "$(dirname "$0")/.." && pwd)"
cd "$REPO"
find . -name SKILL.md -not -path '*/node_modules/*' | sed 's|^\./||' | sort
+8 -1
View File
@@ -1,15 +1,20 @@
--- ---
name: grill-with-docs name: grill-with-docs
description: Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions. description: Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.
disable-model-invocation: true
--- ---
<what-to-do>
Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the design tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one-by-one. For each question, provide your recommended answer. Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the design tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one-by-one. For each question, provide your recommended answer.
Ask the questions one at a time, waiting for feedback on each question before continuing. Ask the questions one at a time, waiting for feedback on each question before continuing.
If a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead. If a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead.
</what-to-do>
<supporting-info>
## Domain awareness ## Domain awareness
During codebase exploration, also look for existing documentation: During codebase exploration, also look for existing documentation:
@@ -79,3 +84,5 @@ Only offer to create an ADR when all three are true:
3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons 3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
If any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in [ADR-FORMAT.md](./ADR-FORMAT.md). If any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in [ADR-FORMAT.md](./ADR-FORMAT.md).
</supporting-info>
@@ -37,10 +37,11 @@ Assume the user does not know what these terms mean. Each section starts with a
> Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-issues`, `triage`, `to-prd`, and `qa` read from and write to it — they need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo. > Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-issues`, `triage`, `to-prd`, and `qa` read from and write to it — they need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo.
Default posture: these skills were designed for GitHub. If a `git remote` points at GitHub, propose that. Otherwise (or if the user prefers), offer: Default posture: these skills were designed for GitHub. If a `git remote` points at GitHub, propose that. If a `git remote` points at GitLab (`gitlab.com` or a self-hosted host), propose GitLab. Otherwise (or if the user prefers), offer:
- **GitHub** — issues live in the repo's GitHub Issues - **GitHub** — issues live in the repo's GitHub Issues (uses the `gh` CLI)
- **Local markdown** — issues live as files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo (good for solo projects or repos without a GitHub remote) - **GitLab** — issues live in the repo's GitLab Issues (uses the [`glab`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/cli) CLI)
- **Local markdown** — issues live as files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo (good for solo projects or repos without a remote)
- **Other** (Jira, Linear, etc.) — ask the user to describe the workflow in one paragraph; the skill will record it as freeform prose - **Other** (Jira, Linear, etc.) — ask the user to describe the workflow in one paragraph; the skill will record it as freeform prose
**Section B — Triage label vocabulary.** **Section B — Triage label vocabulary.**
@@ -108,6 +109,7 @@ The block:
Then write the three docs files using the seed templates in this skill folder as a starting point: Then write the three docs files using the seed templates in this skill folder as a starting point:
- [issue-tracker-github.md](./issue-tracker-github.md) — GitHub issue tracker - [issue-tracker-github.md](./issue-tracker-github.md) — GitHub issue tracker
- [issue-tracker-gitlab.md](./issue-tracker-gitlab.md) — GitLab issue tracker
- [issue-tracker-local.md](./issue-tracker-local.md) — local-markdown issue tracker - [issue-tracker-local.md](./issue-tracker-local.md) — local-markdown issue tracker
- [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md) — label mapping - [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md) — label mapping
- [domain.md](./domain.md) — domain doc consumer rules + layout - [domain.md](./domain.md) — domain doc consumer rules + layout
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
# Issue tracker: GitLab
Issues and PRDs for this repo live as GitLab issues. Use the [`glab`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/cli) CLI for all operations.
## Conventions
- **Create an issue**: `glab issue create --title "..." --description "..."`. Use a heredoc for multi-line descriptions. Pass `--description -` to open an editor.
- **Read an issue**: `glab issue view <number> --comments`. Use `-F json` for machine-readable output.
- **List issues**: `glab issue list --state opened -F json` with appropriate `--label` filters. Note that GitLab uses `opened` (not `open`) for the state value.
- **Comment on an issue**: `glab issue note <number> --message "..."`. GitLab calls comments "notes".
- **Apply / remove labels**: `glab issue update <number> --label "..."` / `--unlabel "..."`. Multiple labels can be comma-separated or by repeating the flag.
- **Close**: `glab issue close <number>`. `glab issue close` does not accept a closing comment, so post the explanation first with `glab issue note <number> --message "..."`, then close.
- **Merge requests**: GitLab calls PRs "merge requests". Use `glab mr create`, `glab mr view`, `glab mr note`, etc. — the same shape as `gh pr ...` with `mr` in place of `pr` and `note`/`--message` in place of `comment`/`--body`.
Infer the repo from `git remote -v``glab` does this automatically when run inside a clone.
## When a skill says "publish to the issue tracker"
Create a GitLab issue.
## When a skill says "fetch the relevant ticket"
Run `glab issue view <number> --comments`.