| name | upstream-recon |
| description | Investigate an open-source project before interacting with it — PRs, issues, or comments. Use BEFORE: filing an issue, submitting a PR, or commenting on an existing thread. Triggers on: "upstream recon", "should I PR this", "will they merge", "check the project", "investigate the repo", "PR strategy", "file an issue", "check existing issues", "should I comment", or any time the user wants to interact with a repo they don't maintain. Also use proactively when about to file an issue or PR — checking existing threads prevents duplicates and wasted effort.
|
Upstream Recon
Investigate a repo's culture and existing threads before interacting. Prevents
duplicate issues, wasted PR effort, and uninformed comments.
Arguments: <owner/repo> [topic-keyword]
Procedure
Use gh CLI throughout. Run independent queries in parallel.
- Repo metadata — stars, forks, license, last push date, archived status
- Top 10 contributors — commit counts. Is it one person with 90%+ commits?
- Existing issues search — search open AND closed issues for the topic keyword.
Check for duplicates, prior art, and maintainer responses. Report what was found.
- Recent 30 PRs (all states) — get the lay of the land
- Merged PRs (last 20) — who merges them? How fast? What types get accepted?
- Closed-without-merge PRs (last 50, filter
mergedAt == null) — deep-dive
2-3 notable rejections: read comments for maintainer reasoning
- Open PRs — how many sit with 0 reviews? For how long?
- Topic deep-dive (if keyword given) — read comments on 2-3 most relevant
existing issues/PRs to understand maintainer sentiment and community workarounds
Analysis Dimensions
- Governance: Solo maintainer / small team / community-driven
- External PR reception: Welcoming / selective (bugs yes, features no) / closed shop
- Issue responsiveness: How fast do maintainers respond to issues? Do they engage or auto-close?
- Merge velocity: Days from open to merge for external contributors
- Rejection patterns: Ghosted? "Building it myself"? "File issue first"? Bot auto-closed?
- Topic overlap: Has this been attempted or discussed before? Active workarounds?
Recommendation
End the report with one of:
- MERGE-LIKELY — project merges external feature PRs, no competing work, maintainer receptive
- MERGE-UNLIKELY — maintainer builds features themselves, similar PRs closed/ignored, feature contradicts direction
- FILE-ISSUE-FIRST — feature not yet discussed, maintainer is selective but responsive to issues, gauge interest before coding
- COMMENT-ON-EXISTING — existing issue/PR already covers this, add your workaround or +1 there instead
- DUPLICATE-EXISTS — exact issue already filed, do not create another
Include concrete next steps (e.g., "comment on #13738 with your workaround",
"start with a bug fix PR to build credibility", "file an issue referencing #189",
"fork and maintain independently").
