setup-repo

name	setup-repo
description	Configure a GitHub repository for workbuddy orchestration — creates labels, the two canonical agent configs (dev + review), workflow definitions, issue templates, and config.yaml. Use when the user says 'set up repo', 'configure repo for workbuddy', 'initialize workbuddy', '配置仓库', '初始化workbuddy', or wants to onboard a new repo.

Setup Repo

Interactive skill that configures a GitHub repository for workbuddy agent orchestration. Creates all required labels, the two canonical agent definitions (dev + review), the state-machine workflows, issue templates with a mandatory Acceptance Criteria section, and the .github/workbuddy/config.yaml.

The 2-agent model (read this first)

Workbuddy's catalog is deliberately minimal: only dev-agent and review-agent. Everything the previous 9-agent catalog did — triage, docs-only work, dependency bumps, release prep, security audits, alternate runtime variants — collapses into this contract:

• Humans write issues with a mandatory ## Acceptance Criteria section listing verifiable criteria. This replaces the old triage-agent — a good issue template is more reliable than an LLM reverse-engineering intent.
• dev-agent (triggers on status:developing): reads the issue; if the Acceptance Criteria section is missing it sets status:blocked and comments; otherwise it produces whatever artifact the criteria demand — code, docs, a dependency bump, a report, release notes — then flips to status:reviewing.
• review-agent (triggers on status:reviewing): evaluates each criterion against the artifact. All pass → status:done. Any fail → status:developing with criterion-by-criterion feedback.
• Runtime (claude-code | codex) is a field on the agent config, not a separate agent. Switch runtimes via repo-level override, not by duplicating agents.
• Operational detail (gh CLI recipes, PR reconciliation, dev-loop commands, branch conventions) lives in the TARGET repo's own CLAUDE.md and optional .claude/skills/. Workbuddy's agent prompts are short contracts, not manuals. See "Step 6" below.

See docs/decisions/2026-04-15-agent-role-consolidation.md in the workbuddy repo for the first-principles rationale.

When to use

• When onboarding a new repository for workbuddy
• When the user wants to add workbuddy support to an existing project
• When recreating or resetting workbuddy configuration

Arguments

The skill accepts one optional argument: the GitHub repository identifier (e.g., owner/repo). If not provided, prompt the user or detect from the current git remote.

What to do

Step 1: Gather information

Determine:

1. Target repo — from the argument, or detect via gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q .nameWithOwner
2. Project language/stack — scan the repo for go.mod, package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, etc.
3. Existing labels — run gh label list --repo <repo> --json name -q '.[].name'
4. Existing workbuddy config — check if .github/workbuddy/ already exists
5. Existing issue templates — check if .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ already has entries
6. Git remote protocol — run git remote -v. If remote uses SSH ([e-mail]:...) but gh auth status shows HTTPS protocol, switch remote to HTTPS:

   git remote set-url origin https://github.com/OWNER/REPO.git
   

   This prevents push failures when agents try to push branches.
7. Commit hooks — check for lefthook/husky/commitlint. If the repo enforces conventional commits, note this — agents need to use the right prefix format.

Step 2: Create labels

Workbuddy uses label-driven state machines. Create the required labels if they don't exist:

workbuddy         — #5319E7 — Opt-in: this issue flows through the workbuddy state machine
type:feature      — #0E8A16 — Feature request (optional classification)
type:bug          — #D73A4A — Bug report (optional classification)
status:developing — #1D76DB — Dev-agent is producing an artifact
status:reviewing  — #D93F0B — Review-agent is verifying acceptance criteria
status:blocked    — #E99695 — Needs human action (typically: missing Acceptance Criteria)
status:done       — #0E8A16 — All acceptance criteria verified green

The workbuddy label is the workflow trigger. Only issues carrying it enter the state machine; plain GitHub issues without it are ignored. This lets a team opt-in issue-by-issue rather than gating every new issue.

Notes on what was dropped from prior versions and why:

• status:triage — removed. Humans classify via issue template + type labels at creation time. A triage state machine node added latency without adding signal.
• status:failed + needs-human — merged into status:blocked. A single "waiting for human" state is simpler and covers retry-exhaustion, missing criteria, and dev-agent self-blocks uniformly.
• type:task — removed. Every issue is either a type:feature or type:bug (or the target repo can add its own custom type labels via Step 9 "Customization").

Use gh label create for each label. Skip labels that already exist (check first).

Step 3: Create issue templates with Acceptance Criteria

Create .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature.md and .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug.md. Both MUST include a ## Acceptance Criteria section — this is the contract dev-agent reads and review-agent verifies against.

feature.md

---
name: Feature
about: Propose a new feature or enhancement
labels: ["workbuddy", "type:feature", "status:developing"]
---

## Context
<!-- What motivates this feature? What problem does it solve? -->

## Proposed Change
<!-- Describe what should be built. -->

## Acceptance Criteria
<!--
Each criterion must be individually verifiable. dev-agent produces an artifact
that satisfies every one; review-agent evaluates each as pass / fail / cannot-judge.
If this section is empty or missing, dev-agent will set status:blocked.
-->
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]

## Additional Notes
<!-- Links, references, related issues. -->

bug.md

---
name: Bug Report
about: Report a defect
labels: ["type:bug", "status:developing"]
---

## Observed Behavior
<!-- What actually happens? Include reproduction steps. -->

## Expected Behavior
<!-- What should happen instead? -->

## Acceptance Criteria
<!--
Typically: "the reproduction steps above no longer produce the observed behavior"
plus any regression-test criterion. Each item must be individually verifiable.
-->
- [ ] Reproduction steps no longer reproduce the bug on <platform/version>
- [ ] Regression test added at <location>
- [ ]

## Environment
<!-- OS, versions, config. -->

Step 4: Create agent definitions

Create .github/workbuddy/agents/ and write these two files — and only these two. Do not create triage-agent, docs-agent, dependency-bump-agent, release-agent, security-audit-agent, or codex-* duplicates. Do not create a schemas/ directory — the 2-agent catalog does not use output_contract.

dev-agent.md

---
name: dev-agent
description: Development agent — produces an artifact satisfying the issue's Acceptance Criteria
triggers:
  - label: "status:developing"
    event: labeled
role: dev
runtime: claude-code
policy:
  sandbox: danger-full-access
  approval: never
  timeout: 30m
prompt: |
  You are the dev agent for repo {{.Repo}}, working on issue #{{.Issue.Number}}.

  Read the issue body and look for a `## Acceptance Criteria` section.

  - If the section is missing or empty: remove label `status:developing`,
    add label `status:blocked`, and post a comment explaining that the issue
    needs verifiable acceptance criteria before dev work can start. Stop.
  - Otherwise: produce the artifact that satisfies every criterion. The
    artifact form depends on the criteria themselves — it may be code, docs,
    a dependency bump, a report, release notes, or any combination. Include
    tests or automated checks for every verifiable criterion.

  When the artifact is linked to this issue, remove label `status:developing`
  and add label `status:reviewing`.

  Use this repo's own CLAUDE.md / .claude/skills/ for project-specific
  dev-loop commands, PR conventions, and tooling. Report the artifact link
  when finished.

  ## Issue
  Title: {{.Issue.Title}}
  Number: #{{.Issue.Number}}
  Body:
  {{.Issue.Body}}
timeout: 30m
---

## Dev Agent

Consumes the issue's `## Acceptance Criteria` and produces an artifact that
satisfies every criterion. Transitions to `status:blocked` if criteria are
missing; otherwise transitions to `status:reviewing` when done.

review-agent.md

---
name: review-agent
description: Review agent — verifies the artifact against the issue's Acceptance Criteria
triggers:
  - label: "status:reviewing"
    event: labeled
role: review
runtime: claude-code
policy:
  sandbox: danger-full-access
  approval: never
  timeout: 15m
prompt: |
  You are the review agent for repo {{.Repo}}, verifying the artifact
  produced for issue #{{.Issue.Number}}.

  Read the issue's `## Acceptance Criteria` section and the artifact
  (PR, comment, or file) linked to this issue. For each criterion, evaluate
  it as pass / fail / cannot-judge, citing concrete evidence — file:line,
  test name, or a quoted excerpt.

  - If every criterion passes: remove label `status:reviewing`, add label
    `status:done`, and post a comment with the criterion-by-criterion verdict.
  - If any criterion fails: remove label `status:reviewing`, add label
    `status:developing`, and post a comment listing the failing criteria
    plus what dev needs to address.

  Use this repo's own CLAUDE.md / .claude/skills/ for project-specific
  review conventions.

  ## Issue
  Title: {{.Issue.Title}}
  Number: #{{.Issue.Number}}
  Body:
  {{.Issue.Body}}
timeout: 15m
---

## Review Agent

Evaluates each acceptance criterion against the produced artifact. All pass →
`status:done`. Any fail → `status:developing` with feedback.

Step 5: Create the workflow definition

Create .github/workbuddy/workflows/default.md. Exactly one workflow per repo — bug vs feature use the same state machine, so they share this file. The classification (type:feature / type:bug) is a labeling convention for humans browsing issues; it does not alter the execution path.

---
name: default
description: Default 2-agent lifecycle for any workbuddy-tracked issue
trigger:
  issue_label: "workbuddy"
max_retries: 3
---

## Default Workflow

Every issue labeled `workbuddy` flows through this state machine.

```yaml
states:
  developing:
    enter_label: "status:developing"
    agent: dev-agent
    transitions:
      - to: reviewing
        when: labeled "status:reviewing"
      - to: blocked
        when: labeled "status:blocked"

  reviewing:
    enter_label: "status:reviewing"
    agent: review-agent
    transitions:
      - to: done
        when: labeled "status:done"
      - to: developing
        when: labeled "status:developing"

  blocked:
    enter_label: "status:blocked"
    transitions:
      - to: developing
        when: labeled "status:developing"

  done:
    enter_label: "status:done"
    action: close_issue
```

### State graph

```
developing ⇄ reviewing → done
   ↑             ↓
   └─── blocked ─┘  (human edits issue, flips back to developing)

Any revisit of a state — including developing↔blocked — counts toward
max_retries; exceeding the limit records retry/failure intent. Label
writeback remains an agent/human action.
```

Step 6: Operational detail lives in the target repo

Workbuddy's agent prompts are intentionally minimal contracts. They do NOT encode gh CLI recipes, branch-switching commands, PR reconciliation rules, or dev-loop commands — because those differ per repo and are better maintained where they are used.

Recommend to the user: the target repo should maintain its own CLAUDE.md describing:

• Dev-loop commands (build, test, vet, lint) for the repo's stack
• PR conventions (branch naming, draft vs ready, review gating, merge strategy)
• Test strategy (mock/real boundary, fixtures, coverage targets)
• Project-specific gh CLI patterns

If the target repo has no CLAUDE.md, offer to scaffold one — but only after confirming with the user, since that's beyond "workbuddy setup".

Step 6b: Initialize agent runtime skills in the target repo

Agent runtimes discover project-level skills from conventional directories inside the working directory. This step is critical — without it, agents only have generic global skills and miss repo-specific development patterns.

The skill directories depend on the runtime configured in the agent definitions:

Runtime	Skill directory	Discovery
claude-code	.claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md	Auto-loaded when skill description matches context
codex	.codex/skills/<name>/SKILL.md	Same — auto-loaded by description match

Create skills for the runtime(s) used by this repo's agents. If runtime: codex is set in the agent configs, create .codex/skills/. If runtime: claude-code, create .claude/skills/. If both runtimes are used (e.g., different agents use different runtimes), create both directories.

Standard skills to initialize

Create these three skills — they are runtime-agnostic in content and give agents a solid operational foundation:

1. dev-loop/SKILL.md — Development cycle: implement → test → verify

---
name: dev-loop
description: "Run a complete development loop: implement, test, vibe-check,
  review, and measure before keeping or discarding. Use when implementing
  features, fixing bugs, writing code, or refactoring."
---

Body should describe the repo's specific build/test/lint commands, the keep/discard decision framework, and how to log progress. Detect the repo's language/stack (from Step 1) and tailor the commands accordingly. For example, a Go repo should mention go build, go test, go vet; a Node repo should mention npm test, npm run lint, etc.

2. long-horizon/SKILL.md — Autonomous decision-making

---
name: long-horizon
description: "Framework for autonomous decision-making during extended tasks.
  Use when working on complex multi-step tasks that require judgment calls
  without human intervention."
---

Body should describe the escalation ladder (convention check → codebase research → external research → north-star reasoning → ask human) and decision logging conventions. This helps agents make good autonomous decisions during dev and review cycles instead of getting stuck.

3. index/SKILL.md (optional, for repos with documentation) — Doc-code consistency

Only create this if the repo has existing documentation (docs/, README.md, design docs, etc.). It helps agents keep documentation aligned with code changes.

Codex-specific: agent metadata files

For codex skills, also create an agents/openai.yaml alongside each SKILL.md with display metadata:

# .codex/skills/dev-loop/agents/openai.yaml
interface:
  display_name: "Dev Loop"
  short_description: "Run a full implement-test-measure loop"
  default_prompt: "Use $dev-loop to drive this task through implementation,
    testing, and verification."

What to put in the skill body

Keep skills lean and repo-specific:

• Reference the repo's actual build/test commands (detected in Step 1)
• Reference the repo's CLAUDE.md for conventions
• Do NOT duplicate generic methodology — link to it or summarize briefly
• The goal is that when an agent reads the skill, it knows exactly how to operate in THIS repo, not just in theory

Commit the skills

Add the skills directory to the same commit as the workbuddy config:

git add .codex/skills/   # or .claude/skills/ depending on runtime

The skills are version-controlled alongside the repo's code, so they evolve with the project.

Step 7: Create config.yaml

Create .github/workbuddy/config.yaml:

# Workbuddy configuration for <repo>
environment: dev
repo: <owner/repo>
poll_interval: 30s
port: 8080

Step 8: Create .workbuddy/ gitignore entry

Add .workbuddy/ to the repo's .gitignore if not already present. This directory holds local runtime state (SQLite DB, session logs).

Step 9: Verify and report

After creating all files:

1. List what was created:

   • Labels created (count)
   • Agent configs created: dev-agent, review-agent (exactly 2)
   • Issue templates created: feature.md, bug.md
   • Workflow created: default (single state machine for all workbuddy issues)
   • config.yaml location

2. Show the state machine diagram:

   developing ⇄ reviewing → done
      ↑             ↓
      └─── blocked ─┘  (human edits issue, flips back to developing)
   
   Reviewer evaluates each Acceptance Criterion from the issue body.
   All pass → done. Any fail → back to developing. Max 3 retries.
   

3. Explain how to use:

   • Start workbuddy: workbuddy serve
   • Open an issue via the feature or bug template; fill the Acceptance Criteria
   • The workbuddy label opts the issue into the state machine; the status:developing label on creation triggers dev-agent automatically
   • Labels flow: developing → reviewing → done (or blocked when criteria missing)
   • Monitor progress on the GitHub issue

Step 10: Register with coordinator (distributed mode)

If the user is running workbuddy in distributed mode, register the repo after committing and pushing the config:

export WORKBUDDY_AUTH_TOKEN="<token>"
workbuddy repo register \
  --coordinator http://coordinator-host:8081 \
  --token "$WORKBUDDY_AUTH_TOKEN"

This must be run from the target repo's root directory. It serializes the local .github/workbuddy/ config and POSTs it to the coordinator.

Then start a worker for the repo:

workbuddy worker \
  --coordinator http://coordinator-host:8081 \
  --token "$WORKBUDDY_AUTH_TOKEN" \
  --runtime codex \
  --repo Owner/Repo

The worker must also be started from the repo root — it loads agent prompt templates from .github/workbuddy/agents/ locally.

What NOT to do

• Don't create agents beyond dev-agent and review-agent. If a user insists, point them at the 2-agent decision record and suggest encoding the need as an issue template + acceptance criteria instead.
• Don't create .github/workbuddy/agents/schemas/ — the 2-agent catalog has no output_contract.
• Don't re-introduce status:triage, status:failed, or needs-human labels — use status:blocked for all human-handoff cases.
• Don't overwrite existing agent/workflow configs without asking.
• Don't delete existing labels.
• Don't modify code in the target repo.
• Don't start workbuddy — just configure it.
• Don't assume the repo uses a specific language — detect it.

Customization

If the user specifies custom requirements:

• Custom runtime (codex instead of claude-code) — set runtime: codex on the agent config. Runtime is a field, not a separate agent.
• Custom type labels beyond feature/bug — add the label and a matching issue template with the same ## Acceptance Criteria contract. The workflow still matches on workbuddy, so the type label is classification only. If you genuinely need a different state machine for a particular class of work, add a new workflow file with a distinct trigger label and have the team apply that label explicitly.
• Custom acceptance criteria conventions — the only hard contract is that dev-agent reads a section literally titled ## Acceptance Criteria. How the team structures criteria within that section is up to the repo.
• Custom policy per label (e.g. read-only sandbox for high-risk changes) — this is planned as Coordinator-side dynamic dispatch keyed on issue labels. Not yet implemented; for now every issue runs under the agent's default policy.