Skip to main content

address-github-comments

Implements intelligent address github comments with multi-factor skill selection, fallback chains, and adherence to the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense

الانتقال إلى التثبيت

معلومات المصدر

المستودع
paulpas/agent-skill-router
آخر نشاط في المصدر
٤ يونيو ٢٠٢٦ في ٢٣:٣١
لغة SKILL.md المكتشفة
الإنجليزية
النجوم
٦
التفرعات
٠

خيارات التثبيت

يُحدَّد Prompt الذي يراجع المصدر أولًا بشكل افتراضي. يمكنك التبديل إلى أمر مباشر أو تنزيل نسخة محلية.

مراجعة ملفات المصدر

اقرأ SKILL.md وأي ملفات مرافقة يعرضها SkillsMP قبل أن تقرر التثبيت.

عرض SKILL.md

SKILL.md
تعليمات المصدر · معاينة للقراءة فقط
name
address-github-comments
compatibility
opencode
completeness
95
content-types
["guidance","examples","do-dont"]
description
Implements intelligent address github comments with multi-factor skill selection, fallback chains, and adherence to the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense
license
MIT
maturity
stable
metadata
{"domain":"agent","output-format":"analysis","related-skills":"agent-confidence-based-selector, agent-task-routing","role":"orchestration","scope":"orchestration","triggers":"address-github-comments, address github comments, how do i address-github-comments, orchestrate address-github-comments, automate address-github-comments, agent address-github-comments","archetypes":["orchestration","strategic"],"anti_triggers":["brainstorming","vague ideation","single-agent monolith"],"response_profile":{"verbosity":"medium","directive_strength":"high","abstraction_level":"tactical"}}
version
1.0.0
# Address Github Comments Orchestrates intelligent skill selection and execution for address github comments workflows. Applies the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense to guide data naturally through the orchestration pipeline, preventing errors before they occur. Selects optimal skills based on multi-factor scoring including text similarity, historical performance, and system availability. ## TL;DR Checklist - [ ] Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2) - [ ] Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1) - [ ] Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4) - [ ] Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3) - [ ] Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions - [ ] Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail - [ ] Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection - [ ] Update confidence scores after each execution for learning ┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Orchestration Flow │ └───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ User Request ↓ ┌─────────────────┐ │ Parse Request │ │ & Extract │ │ Features │ └────────┬────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Evaluate Available Skills │ │ │ │ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ │ │ │ Skill A │ │ Skill B │ │ Skill C │ │ │ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │ │ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │ │ │ - History │ │ - History │ │ - History │ │ │ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ └─────────────────┴─────────────────┘ │ │ ↓ │ │ Select Best Skill │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────┐ │ Execute Skill │ └────────┬────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────┐ │ Handle Result │ └────────┬────────┘ ↓ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Error Handling & Fallback │ │ │ │ Success? ────────► Return Result │ │ │ │ Fail? ────────┐ │ │ ↓ │ │ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ │ │ Fallback Chain │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 1. Retry with adjusted parameters │ │ │ │ 2. Try Alternative Skill (if available) │ │ │ │ 3. Defer to Human Operator (if critical) │ │ │ │ 4. Log & Return Error │ │ │ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ ## When to Use Use this skill when: - Orchestrating multi-step workflows that require skill delegation - Implementing adaptive skill routing based on confidence scores - Building fallback mechanisms for failed skill executions - Creating intelligent task decomposition and parallel execution - Designing skill dependency graphs with automatic resolution - Implementing skill selection with historical performance weighting - Building agent systems that need to self-organize around tasks ## When NOT to Use Avoid this skill for: - Direct task execution without orchestration needs - use individual skills instead - High-frequency trading scenarios where latency must be minimized - the selection overhead may be prohibitive - Simple linear workflows without branching or fallback requirements - Cases where skill metadata is unavailable or unreliable ## Core Workflow 1. **Parse and Analyze Request** - Extract intent, entities, and constraints from user input. **Checkpoint:** All required parameters must be present and in valid format before proceeding. 2. **Score Available Skills** - Calculate match scores using multi-factor algorithm: - Text similarity between request and skill triggers - Historical success rate for similar tasks - Skill availability and health status - Required dependencies and their availability **Checkpoint:** Skip to fallback if no skill scores above threshold. 3. **Select Optimal Skill** - Choose skill with highest score that meets minimum confidence. **Checkpoint:** Verify skill has not been disabled or deprecated. 4. **Execute with Fallback** - Run skill execution wrapped in retry and fallback logic. **Checkpoint:** Log all execution attempts for audit trail. 5. **Return or Fallback** - Either return successful result or apply fallback chain: - Retry with adjusted parameters - Try alternative skill from `related-skills` - Defer to human operator for critical tasks **Checkpoint:** Record outcome with timing and confidence metadata. ## Implementation Patterns ### Pattern 1: Skill Selection Logic ```python def analyze_and_select_action( github_event: Dict, repo_config: Dict, min_confidence: float = 0.7 ) -> Optional[Dict]: """Analyze a GitHub comment and select the appropriate response action. Evaluates comment intent against repository-specific guidelines to determine whether to auto-reply, request clarification, apply a code fix, or escalate. Args: github_event: Raw webhook payload or parsed comment context repo_config: Repository-specific rules, labels, and maintainer preferences min_confidence: Minimum confidence threshold for automated responses Returns: Action plan dictionary with strategy, parameters, and confidence Raises: ValueError: If github_event lacks required fields or repo_config is invalid """ # Guard clause - Early Exit (Law 1) if not github_event or not github_event.get("comment", {}).get("body"): raise ValueError("Invalid GitHub comment event: missing body") if not repo_config.get("allowed_actions"): raise ValueError("Repository configuration missing allowed_actions") # Parse input - Make Illegal States Unrepresentable (Law 2) comment_data = _normalize_comment(github_event["comment"]) repo_rules = _load_active_rules(repo_config) best_action = None best_score = 0.0 for action in repo_config["allowed_actions"]: score = _score_action_match(comment_data, action, repo_rules) if score > best_score and score >= min_confidence: best_score = score best_action = action if best_action is None: return None # Atomic Predictability (Law 3) - Return new dict, don't mutate result = dict(best_action) result["selected_confidence"] = best_score result["comment_id"] = github_event["comment"]["id"] result["timestamp"] = time.time() return result ``` ### Pattern 2: Execution with Fallback ```python def execute_comment_response( action_plan: Dict, github_client: Any, max_retries: int = 2 ) -> Dict: """Execute the selected response action for a GitHub comment with fallback chain. Implements the Fail Fast, Fail Loud principle (Law 4): - Invalid states halt immediately with descriptive errors - No silent failures or partial results Fallback chain: 1. Retry with original parameters 2. Retry with adjusted parameters (e.g., shorter response, different template) 3. Queue for manual review if rate-limited or critical 4. Log & return error with context for audit trail Args: action_plan: Selected action strategy with parameters github_client: Authenticated GitHub API client instance max_retries: Maximum retry attempts before fallback Returns: Execution result with metadata (success, timing, confidence, response_url) Raises: GitHubResponseError: If all retries and fallbacks exhausted """ # Guard clause - validate action plan (Early Exit) if not _is_action_valid(action_plan): raise GitHubResponseError(f"Invalid action plan: {action_plan.get('type', 'unknown')}") # Parse context - Ensure trusted state (Law 2) validated_params = _validate_response_params(action_plan, github_client) for attempt in range(max_retries + 1): try: # Execute domain-specific GitHub API call response_url = github_client.post_comment( repo=validated_params["repo"], issue_number=validated_params["issue_number"], body=validated_params["response_body"], in_reply_to=validated_params["comment_id"] ) # Success - Atomic Predictability (Law 3) return { "success": True, "action_executed": action_plan["type"], "response_url": response_url, "attempts": attempt + 1, "latency_ms": _calculate_latency(), "confidence": action_plan["selected_confidence"] } except RateLimitError as e: # Transient error - try fallback if attempt == max_retries: return _queue_for_manual_review(action_plan, validated_params) time.sleep(2 ** attempt) # Exponential backoff except InvalidStateError as e: # Fail Fast - Don't try to patch bad data (Law 4) raise GitHubResponseError( f"Invalid state during response: {str(e)}" ) from e # All retries exhausted - Fail Loud (Law 4) raise GitHubResponseError( f"Failed to post response after {max_retries + 1} attempts" ) ``` ### MUST DO - Always validate skill metadata before selection (Early Exit) - Implement fallback chain with at least 2 levels (Fallback Skill + Human) - Log all skill selections with full context for auditability - Return new data structures instead of mutating inputs (Atomic Predictability) - Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states - Update confidence scores after each execution for adaptive routing - Reference `code-philosophy` (5 Laws of Elegant Defense) in all logic ### MUST NOT DO - Select skills based on a single factor (e.g., only confidence score) - Disable fallback mechanisms "temporarily" - this creates fragile systems - Skip validation of skill dependencies before execution - Return partial results - either complete success or clear failure - Use magic numbers for confidence thresholds - make them configurable - Cache skill selections without considering context changes ## TL;DR Checklist - [ ] Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2) - [ ] Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1) - [ ] Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4) - [ ] Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3) - [ ] Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions - [ ] Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail - [ ] Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection - [ ] Update confidence scores after each execution for learning ## TL;DR for Code Generation - Use guard clauses - return early on invalid input before doing work - Return simple types (dict, str, int, bool, list) - avoid complex nested objects - Cyclomatic complexity < 10 per function - split anything larger - Handle null/empty cases explicitly at function top (Early Exit) - Never mutate input parameters - return new dicts/objects - Fail fast with descriptive errors - don't try to "patch" bad data - Reference code-philosophy laws in comments for complex logic - Include timing and confidence metadata in all return values ## Output Template When applying this skill, produce: 1. **Selected Skills** - List of skill names with confidence scores 2. **Selection Rationale** - Why each skill was chosen (match score, history, availability) 3. **Execution Plan** - Order of execution with dependencies 4. **Fallback Strategy** - Which fallback skills will be tried and in what order 5. **Risk Assessment** - Any potential failure points and their impact 6. **Timing Estimates** - Expected latency including fallback scenarios --- --- ## Constraints ### MUST DO - Define clear input/output contracts for every step in the orchestration flow with explicit validation - Implement structured logging at each stage capturing context, inputs, outputs, timing, and errors - Build in fallback paths: if the primary strategy fails, degrade gracefully to a simpler approach - Validate all preconditions before starting — do not proceed if required resources or permissions are missing ### MUST NOT DO - Do not create deep nesting of orchestration steps (>5 levels) — flatten workflows where possible - Avoid silent failure modes: every step must either succeed, fail explicitly, or escalate to a higher handler - Never use shared mutable state between parallel workflow branches — communicate via immutable messages only - Do not hardcode execution order when the dependency graph naturally determines it; derive order from explicit dependencies ## Live References > Authoritative documentation links for this skill's domain. The model follows markdown links at load time to resolve external references and inline content. - [GitHub API Documentation](<https://docs.github.com/en/rest>) - [GitHub Webhooks Reference](<https://docs.github.com/en/webhooks/webhook-events-and-payloads>) - [OpenAPI Specification](<https://swagger.io/specification/>) - [RESTful API Design Guide (Microsoft)](<https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/styleguide/api-design-guide/>) - [GitHub Actions Expressions](<https://docs.github.com/en/actions/reference/context-and-expression-syntax-for-github-actions>) ## Related Skills | Skill | Purpose | |
عرض على GitHub