Address actionable GitHub pull request review comments for xquic. Use when asked to handle PR review feedback, requested changes, unresolved inline threads, or reviewer comments while preserving unrelated edits.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Classify XQUIC GitHub issues with an evidence-backed L1-L4 resolution-complexity label while keeping validity, priority, severity, and disposition separate and skipping uniquely labeled issues unless the user explicitly forces a recheck. Use when triaging one issue or a batch of issues, creating an issue-complexity backlog, or applying or correcting L1-L4 GitHub labels.
インストール方法を見るインストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Estimate the work needed to resolve an issue. Do not use complexity as proof that a report is valid or as a proxy for priority or severity.
harness/spec/issue-complexity/spec.md in full.main, reading source, or investigating protocol behavior.L1, L2, L3, or L4.skipped-existing-label and the
existing level without rerunning classification or calling a label API. In
a batch, continue with the remaining issues and count the skipped row.inconsistent-existing-label and stop without mutation.origin/main commit SHA.
Classify current behavior, not a stale release or issue-provided line number.harness/spec/architecture.md and
harness/spec/harness-manifest.yml to identify affected modules, public
APIs, feature gates, tests, and validation boundaries.For batch triage, use issue text and focused current-source inspection for the first pass. Record missing evidence rather than expanding every issue into a full investigation.
Route a claimed QUIC, HTTP/3, QPACK, TLS, recovery, DATAGRAM, multipath, or MoQT
defect through issue-check before calling it a verified defect, closing it as
not-a-problem, implementing a fix, or applying a high-confidence label based on
that claim.
Use these disposition values independently from the L1-L4 level:
verified-defectnot-a-problemduplicate-or-obsoletefeature-requestquestion-or-supportinconclusiveA not-a-problem closure can be L1 work. A localized interoperability defect can be L2 despite high severity. An unsupported major feature can be L4 even when no defect exists.
Apply every scenario in harness/spec/issue-complexity/spec.md. Evaluate:
Choose the highest level required by any dimension. Do not average dimensions or lower the level because the apparent code diff is short. If one issue mixes independent requests, recommend splitting it; until split, use the highest level and explain which sub-request controls it.
Set confidence to:
high: current source, intended behavior, affected boundaries, and required
validation are established;medium: the likely boundary is established but one non-decisive observation
or test obligation remains;low: source applicability, intended behavior, protocol version, or blast
radius is unresolved.Only high confidence is eligible for label mutation. Confidence applies to
the resolution-complexity boundary, not to whether the issue claim is true. A
preliminary batch may contain medium or low confidence rows when their gaps
are explicit, but those rows remain unlabelled.
For one issue, return:
issue: <URL>
status: classified
existing_level: L1 | L2 | L3 | L4 | none
forced_recheck: true | false
inspected_main: <full SHA>
level: L1 | L2 | L3 | L4
confidence: high | medium | low
disposition: <independent disposition value>
rationale: <concise controlling complexity reason>
affected_boundaries:
- <module, API, or state boundary>
protocol:
source: <exact RFC/draft section or not-applicable>
compatibility_risk: low | medium | high
validation:
unit: <paired coverage or gap>
endpoint: <paired coverage or gap>
interoperability: <evidence or gap>
blocking_evidence:
- <missing evidence; empty when high confidence>
next_action: <verification, closure explanation, design, or implementation gate>
For a skipped issue, return only its URL, status: skipped-existing-label,
existing level, and skip reason. Do not claim current-main revalidation.
For a batch, add one row per issue. Classified rows include issue, level,
confidence, disposition, reason, and next action; skipped rows include issue,
status, and existing level. Include level totals, confidence gaps, skipped
count, and the inspected main SHA for classified issues. Keep full evidence
available outside any compact summary.
Use these repository labels exactly:
| Label | Color | Description |
|---|---|---|
L1 | 5CC665 | L1 - Local change with simple logic and no peer-visible interoperability impact. |
L2 | F1F665 | L2 - Bounded feature with moderate state reasoning and verified backward-compatible peer behavior. |
L3 | EC5C03 | L3 - Complex state interactions with interoperability or potential legacy-version risk. |
L4 | 481BCB | L4 - Protocol-wide change with extreme reasoning complexity or known incompatibility. |
Before mutation, restate the repository, issue, old complexity label, new label, inspected SHA, and confidence. Stop if multiple L1-L4 labels already exist or if the target label definition differs from this table.
When authorized and high confidence:
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Address actionable GitHub pull request review comments for xquic. Use when asked to handle PR review feedback, requested changes, unresolved inline threads, or reviewer comments while preserving unrelated edits.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Debug and fix failing GitHub PR checks for xquic. Use when a PR, branch, or commit has failed CI, GitHub Actions, build checks, test checks, or requested validation failures that should be diagnosed from logs before editing.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Review XQUIC harness structure for bloat, duplicated facts, trigger overlap, reference drift, and missing hard checks. Use when changing AGENTS.md, harness specs, pipelines, skills, setup scripts, validation routing, or when asked to audit harness design.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Verify whether a proposed XQUIC bug issue is real by checking the cited RFC or Internet-Draft mechanism against the repository's actual source behavior, tracing any root cause to current file and line evidence, and returning a fail-closed boolean gate. Use when validating an issue draft, investigating a claimed QUIC, HTTP/3, QPACK, or MoQT protocol violation, or before issue-submit may publish an issue.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Draft and submit evidence-backed XQUIC GitHub bug issues in the repository's CONTRIBUTING and issue-template format. Use when preparing or opening an alibaba/xquic issue that must identify an exact RFC or draft mechanism, expected-versus-actual behavior, reproduction evidence, and optional verified source root cause; requires issue-check to return true before any GitHub submission.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Enforce XQUIC test coverage and local validation gates. Use when code, build, or test changes need verification; before commit or pull request; or when asked to build, test, validate, or verify XQUIC. Requires paired happy-path and abnormal-path unit tests, the complete local unit suite, and explicit endpoint coverage or gap reporting for production behavior changes.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。