write-issue

name	write-issue
description	Reference standards for writing and maintaining GitHub issues in the tldraw repository. Use as supporting guidance when another skill or workflow needs issue title, body, type, label, or triage standards.

Writing and maintaining GitHub issues

Standards for issues in tldraw/tldraw.

Title standards

• Sentence case - Capitalize only the first word and proper nouns
• No type prefixes - Use GitHub issue types, not Bug:, Feature:, [Bug], etc.
• Imperative mood for enhancements - "Add padding option" not "Adding padding option"
• Descriptive for bugs - Describe the symptom: "Arrow bindings break with rotated shapes"
• Specific - Readable without opening the issue body

Good titles

• Arrow bindings break with rotated shapes
• Add padding option to zoomToFit method
• Pinch zoom resets selection on Safari

Bad titles

• Bug: arrow bug (prefix, vague)
• [Feature] Add new feature (prefix, vague)
• Not working (vague)

Title cleanup transformations

1. Remove prefixes: Bug: X → X
2. Fix capitalization: Add Padding Option → Add padding option
3. Use imperative: Adding feature X → Add feature X
4. Be specific: Problem → [Describe the actual problem]
5. Translate non-English titles to English

Issue types

Set via the GitHub GraphQL API after creating the issue (the --type flag is not reliably supported):

Type	Use for
Bug	Something isn't working as expected
Feature	New capability or improvement
Example	Request for a new SDK example
Task	Internal task or chore

Labels

Use sparingly (1-2 per issue) for metadata, not categorization.

Common labels

Label	Use for
good first issue	Well-scoped issues for newcomers
More Info Needed	Requires additional information
sdk	Affects the tldraw SDK
dotcom	Related to tldraw.com
a11y	Accessibility
performance	Performance improvement
api	API change

Automation labels (do not apply manually)

keep, stale, update-snapshots, publish-packages, major, minor, skip-release, deploy triggers

Issue body standards

Bug reports

1. Clear description of what's wrong
2. Steps to reproduce
3. Expected vs actual behavior
4. Environment details (browser, OS, version) when relevant
5. Screenshots/recordings when applicable

Feature requests

1. Problem statement - What problem does this solve?
2. Proposed solution - How should it work?
3. Alternatives considered
4. Use cases

Example requests

1. What API/pattern to demonstrate
2. Why it's useful
3. Suggested approach
4. Which example category it belongs to

Agent-drafted issues (problem readback and open questions)

Issues created by the /issue skill capture the user's intent over a short interrogation, so they carry an unheaded readback paragraph beneath the verbatim description, followed by open questions and a confidence status line at the bottom:

• Problem readback - A brief, unheaded paragraph that states the agent's interpretation of the problem, expected behavior, and scope. It should be easy for the user to correct. Keep it product-facing: no code blocks, no long implementation analysis, no file paths, no function names, no line numbers, and no fix recipes unless the user explicitly asks for them.
• Open questions - A numbered list of the specific gaps in intent or context still worth asking the user about. Answers are written beneath each question as the user replies, and the readback is revised each round. A question prefixed with Critical: is genuinely blocking — the issue cannot be worked on until it is answered. Most issues have none. Non-critical questions the user chooses not to answer are marked _Deferred by user; not blocking implementation._.
• Confidence line - A plain-text line at the bottom, not a section heading, such as Confidence: 84%, ready to get started. or Confidence: 42%, still need more information. It reflects whether the issue has enough of the user's intent and context to work on, not confidence in the eventual fix.

Leave the readback, open questions, and confidence line in the issue once interrogation is complete. The answered questions are a record of the discussion that produced the issue, so keep them rather than deleting them — mark questions resolved in place and keep the final readback as the issue's concise problem statement.

Triage workflow

New issues

1. Verify sufficient information to act on
2. Set appropriate issue type
3. Clean up title if needed
4. Add More Info Needed label and comment if details missing
5. Add good first issue if appropriate

Stale issues

1. Review if still relevant
2. Close if no longer applicable
3. Add keep label if should remain open
4. Request updates if waiting on information

Important

• Never include AI attribution unless the issue directly relates to AI tooling
• Never use title case for descriptions - use sentence case