assess

name	assess
description	Understand a Quay bug report from JIRA or GitHub. Fetches ticket details, checks for existing work, classifies as UI vs backend, and proposes an investigation plan. No code changes.
allowed-tools	["Bash(bash .claude/scripts/jira-ops.sh *)","Bash(gh issue view *)","Bash(gh pr list *)","Bash(gh search prs *)","Bash(gh repo clone *)","Bash(git log *)","Bash(ls *)","Read","Glob","Grep","AskUserQuestion"]

Assess Bug Report

Understand the bug before taking any action. This phase produces an assessment report — no code execution, no project code modifications (writing assessment artifacts and cloning repositories is allowed).

Your Role

Read the bug report, present your understanding back to the user, identify gaps, and propose a plan. Let the user correct you before you invest effort in the wrong direction.

Critical Rules

• Do not start reproducing, diagnosing, or fixing. Analysis and planning only.
• Do not run the project's code or tests. You may read code, but do not execute it yet.
• Be honest about uncertainty. If the report is vague, say so.

Process

Step 1: Gather the Bug Report

Accept either a JIRA ticket key, a GitHub issue URL, or a free-text description from the user.

For JIRA tickets:

bash .claude/scripts/jira-ops.sh view $TICKET

Extract: summary, description, type, component, priority, labels, comments, reporter, attachments.

For GitHub issues:

gh issue view NUMBER --repo ${DEFAULT_REPO:-quay/quay} --json title,body,labels,comments,state

For free-text descriptions: Use the conversation context directly.

Step 2: Ensure the Repository Is Available

ls /workspace/repos/ 2>/dev/null

If the project repo is present (e.g., /workspace/repos/quay/), note its path. If not, clone it:

gh repo clone ${DEFAULT_REPO:-quay/quay} /workspace/repos/quay

Read referenced files or code paths to inform the assessment. This is read-only exploration.

Step 3: Check for Existing Work

Search for PRs or related issues that may already address this bug:

gh pr list --search "$TICKET" --state all --repo ${DEFAULT_REPO:-quay/quay} --json number,title,headRefName --jq '.[] | "\(.number)\t\(.title)"'
gh search prs "$TICKET" --repo ${DEFAULT_REPO:-quay/quay}

If an open PR appears to directly address this bug, stop and use AskUserQuestion before continuing. Present options:

• "PR #N appears to address this bug — review it instead of starting fresh"
• "PR #N is related but doesn't fully cover it — continue with assessment"
• "Not sure if PR #N is relevant — continue with assessment"

Do not continue until the user responds.

Step 4: Check Backport Requirement

bash .claude/scripts/jira-ops.sh check-version $TICKET

If Target Version is set, note that backporting will be required after merge.

Step 5: Classify the Bug

Determine whether this is a UI bug or Backend bug:

UI indicators: component is ui or web; keywords like rendering, display, button, form, modal, PatternFly, React; screenshot attachments.

Backend indicators: component is api, data, auth, workers, storage, buildman; keywords like endpoint, database, migration, worker, ORM; log file or stack trace attachments.

Step 6: Summarize Understanding

Present to the user:

• What the bug is: One or two sentences describing the problem
• Where it occurs: Which Quay subsystem is affected (use the subsystem map from CLAUDE.md)
• Severity/impact: Based on JIRA priority and your assessment
• Available information: What the report provides
• Gaps: What's missing or unclear
• Assumptions: Any assumptions you're making

Step 7: Propose Investigation Plan

Based on your understanding, outline:

• What environment or setup is needed for reproduction
• What specific steps you would follow
• What you would look for to confirm the bug exists
• Which Quay subsystems to investigate during diagnosis

Step 8: Write Assessment Artifact

Save to artifacts/quay-bugfix/reports/assessment.md:

# Bug Assessment: <TICKET>

## Summary
<One-paragraph understanding of the bug>

## Classification
- **Type:** UI / Backend
- **Subsystem:** <from CLAUDE.md subsystem map>
- **Severity:** <from JIRA priority>
- **Component:** <JIRA component>

## Existing Work
<Any related PRs, issues, or prior fixes found — or "None found">

## Available Information
- <what the report provides>

## Gaps
- <what's missing or unclear>

## Assumptions
- <any assumptions being made>

## Proposed Investigation Plan
1. Reproduce: <specific steps>
2. Diagnose: <subsystems and code areas to investigate>
3. Fix approach: <initial hypothesis, if any>

## Backport Required
<Yes/No — based on Target Version field>

Confidence Assessment

Include this section at the end of your assessment artifact:

## Confidence Assessment
- **Level**: high | medium | low
- **Score**: <0-100 integer>
- **Score rationale**: <1-2 sentences>
- **Open questions**: <bullet list, or "None">

Confidence signals for this phase:

• High: Clear bug report with reproduction steps, single component identified, good logs/traces available
• Medium: Bug report has some details but missing reproduction steps or unclear component
• Low: Vague report, multiple possible components, missing critical details, no reproduction steps

Output

• Assessment presented directly to the user (inline)
• Assessment saved to artifacts/quay-bugfix/reports/assessment.md
• No project code is modified (only assessment artifacts are written)

When This Phase Is Done

Report your assessment: understanding, gaps, plan, and backport status.