fusion-issue-solving

name	fusion-issue-solving
description	Handles GitHub issue resolution end-to-end for prompts like "solve #123", "lets solve #123", "work on #123", "work on https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123", or by pasting a direct GitHub issue URL as the request. USE FOR: solve #123, continue work on issue #123, work on https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123, paste a GitHub issue URL for implementation work. DO NOT USE FOR: issue drafting only, PR review only, or non-implementation research.
license	MIT
metadata	{"version":"0.1.6","status":"experimental","owner":"@equinor/fusion-core","tags":["github","github-issue","issue-solving","issue-workflow","implementation","workflow","continue"],"mcp":{"suggested":["github","mcp_fusion"]}}

Issue Solving Workflow

When to use

Use this skill when the user wants to solve or continue a GitHub issue end-to-end, including short current-repo prompts like solve #123, direct GitHub issue URLs, or requests like lets work on https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123.

Typical triggers:

• "lets solve #123"
• "solve #123"
• "work on #123"
• "lets work on https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123"
• "https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123"
• "continue work on issue #123"
• "implement issue #123 end-to-end"
• "work on this ticket: [issue URL]"
• "research, implement, and prepare a PR for this issue"

Treat GitHub issue URLs as interchangeable with #123 references for verbs like solve, fix, implement, continue, finish, or work on. A direct GitHub issue URL can also serve as the main request payload for this workflow when no competing intent is stated.

When not to use

Do not use this skill when:

• the request is only issue drafting/authoring,
• no implementation changes are expected,
• repository write operations are disallowed.

Required inputs

Collect before execution:

• issue URL or owner/repo#number,
• repository and branch/worktree decision,
• acceptance criteria and out-of-scope constraints,
• required validation commands for the target repository.

Optional inputs:

• related issues/PRs,
• risk areas to prioritize,
• requested commit/PR granularity.

Instructions

1. Ask whether to use a dedicated git worktree

   • Ask this before any other workflow questions.
   • If yes, use/create the worktree and continue there.

2. Confirm issue context and success criteria

   • Read the issue body, labels, and linked discussions once, then reuse that context instead of refetching.
   • Restate the implementable scope and explicitly list out-of-scope items.

3. Confirm assignee intent for issue closure work

   • Check whether the current user is assigned to the primary issue.
   • If the current user is not assigned, ask whether they want to assign themselves before continuing.
   • For each sub-issue that will be resolved or closed by this workflow, check assignee status once and reuse the result for closure decisions.
   • If the current user is not assigned on a sub-issue, ask whether they want to assign themselves before resolving/closing it.

4. Apply low-token GitHub strategy

   • Prefer MCP-backed tools over ad hoc gh api or GraphQL calls when equivalent tools exist.
   • Avoid duplicate lookups for labels, issue types, and duplicate detection.
   • Cache per-run context (issue metadata, duplicate matches, issue-type support, label sets, assignee candidates) and reuse it — do not re-fetch data that was already retrieved in this session.
   • When delegating to fusion-issue-authoring or its subordinate skills, the orchestrator's session-cache rules apply: labels and assignee candidates are fetched once per repository, issue types once per organization.
   • Use GraphQL fallback only when MCP coverage is unavailable and do not loop retries.
   • GraphQL mutations cost 5 secondary-limit points each (vs 1 for queries); batch fields into single calls and pause at least 1 second between mutation calls.
   • Budget awareness: a typical implementation session (read issue + duplicate check + 1–2 mutations + sub-issue links) should stay under ~20 MCP read calls and ~5 mutations. If the running total approaches 30+ calls, pause optional enrichment and proceed with local work.
   • Respect retry-after and x-ratelimit-reset headers; do not retry before the indicated wait.
   • If rate limits are hit, stop non-essential operations and continue with local implementation/PR preparation when possible.

5. Build and track a concrete plan

   • Create actionable todos ordered by dependencies.
   • Keep exactly one step in progress and update status as work completes.

6. Research before edits

   • Inspect relevant files, tests, and adjacent usage.
   • Prefer root-cause fixes over surface patches.

7. Implement in small scoped changes

   • Keep each change aligned to issue acceptance criteria.
   • Avoid unrelated refactors and generated release artifacts.

8. Validate incrementally

   • Run targeted checks first, then required project checks.
   • If checks fail, fix relevant issues and re-run before proceeding.

9. Prepare PR-ready output

   • Summarize what changed and why.
   • Include validation evidence and known follow-ups.
   • Draft the PR body in a .tmp/ file with an issue/context-specific name (for example, .tmp/pr-body-issue-123-scope-summary.md), not a shared .tmp/pr-body.md.
   • Base the draft on .github/pull_request_template.md and keep it updated as implementation evolves.
   • Ask which base branch to target and propose a likely default (typically main, or the branch the current branch was cut from).
   • Ask whether the PR should be opened as draft or ready for review.
   • Ask whether the PR should be assigned to the user and whether related issues should be linked.

10. Optional GitHub mutation steps

• Before any GitHub mutation (create/edit/comment/close), ask for explicit user confirmation.
• If requested, update issue status/comments with objective progress.
• Prefer MCP tool mutations over ad hoc API calls when equivalent operations exist.
• If GitHub API rate limits block mutation, report the failure clearly, stop retry loops, and propose a safe retry sequence.
• If requested, create or update the PR using the repository PR template and the .tmp/ PR body draft file, using the confirmed base branch, draft/ready state, assignee choice, and related issue links.

Expected output

Return a concise delivery report with:

• implemented scope vs original issue criteria,
• files changed,
• validation commands and outcomes,
• assignment decisions for primary issue and affected sub-issues,
• API usage strategy used (MCP-first/cache reuse/fallbacks),
• open risks/blockers,
• PR body summary (or .tmp/ draft file path when created).

Assets

• assets/issue-solving-checklist.md

Safety & constraints

• This skill is mutation-capable. Repository-local workflow instructions take precedence over inline guidance when they conflict.
• Never request or expose secrets/credentials.
• Never run destructive commands without explicit confirmation.
• Keep changes minimal and scoped to the issue.
• Do not claim checks passed without running them.
• Follow repository instructions and contribution rules.