本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

issue-sync

Mirror issues and status across issue trackers with stable external-ID mapping to avoid duplicates. Load when syncing GitHub and Linear issues, mirroring ticket status, or keeping two trackers in sync. Also triggers on "issue sync", "sync issues", "mirror issues to", "keep Linear and GitHub in sync", or bidirectional issue tracker updates. Requires API access on both sides — stops if credentials missing.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md3.2 KB
  • references/examples.md283 B
  • references/SYNC-SCHEMA.md618 B

SKILL.md(原文)

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。

Issue Sync

You mirror create/update/close events between source and target trackers using a stable external-ID map — no duplicate issues.

Hard Rules

Maintain mapping at .agent-loom/issue-sync-map.json — {source_id, target_id, status, last_synced_at}. Never create a target issue without recording the mapping. On update: look up mapping first; create only if absent. Never store API tokens in repo — env vars only. If either side credentials missing, list required env names and stop.


Workflow

Step 1 — Identify source and target

Example: GitHub → Linear, or Linear → GitHub. Confirm direction with user if ambiguous.

Step 2 — Load or init map

Read .agent-loom/issue-sync-map.json. Create {"mirrors":[]} if missing.

Step 3 — Fetch source changes

List open/recently updated issues since last_synced_at (or user-provided window).

Step 4 — Apply to target

Source eventTarget action
createCreate issue + append mapping
update statusUpdate mapped target status
closeClose mapped target

Step 5 — Write map + summary

Persist updated mirrors. Emit sync report.


Gotchas

  • Title-only matching causes duplicates — always use mapping file.
  • Bidirectional sync needs conflict policy — default: source wins unless user says otherwise.
  • Body HTML vs markdown may truncate — sync title + status + link back.

Output Format

## Issue sync — [source] → [target]

Created: N | Updated: N | Closed: N | Skipped (mapped): N
Map: `.agent-loom/issue-sync-map.json`

Errors: [none | list]

Examples

Teaser: 3 new GitHub issues → 3 Linear issues created with github:#42 in description.

Full pairs: references/examples.md


Common Rationalizations

ExcuseReality
"Match by title"Titles change; duplicates multiply.
"Skip map file"Next sync creates duplicates.
"Embed PAT in script"Tokens leak from repo history.
"Sync everything ever"Window by last_synced_at — incremental.
"Bidirectional without policy"Conflicts will corrupt state.

Verification

  • Mapping file updated
  • No duplicate target for same source_id
  • Credentials not written to disk
  • Sync counts reported

Red Flags

  • New target issue without map entry
  • API token in committed file
  • Full resync without user request

Prune Log

Last pruned: 2026-07-05

  • Initial release from high-leverage skill spec (Skill 3 family)

Impact Report

Issue sync: [src]→[tgt] | +N ~N -N | Map entries: N

レビュー

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。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Put on the adversarial hat and systematically attack any document, plan, strategy, or idea to expose its weakest points before commitment. Structured devil's advocate with red team rigour — not pessimism, but evidence-based critique across three phases: diagnostic (are claims accurate?), creative (is the problem artificially constrained?), challenge (are solutions robust?). Load when the user asks to stress test a document, red team this plan, poke holes in this, devil's advocate this, challenge my assumptions, or when product-soul, brainstorming, prd-writing, or inversion calls for adversarial review. Also triggers on "what am I missing", "what could kill this", "find the flaws", or "critique this rigorously".

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。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Design execution structure for decomposed processes: single agent or multi-agent topology. Load when user says "design an agent for this", "what agent structure do I need", "architect this", "should this be multi-agent", "what's the right execution structure", "agent topology", "how should agents be organized". Takes process-decomposer output as primary input. If triggered directly without a process entry, calls process-decomposer first.

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。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Internal skill. Called by setup-evaluation after a PASS. Launches agents from a validated architecture spec using Claude Code / Ampcode native parallelism (Task tool). Does NOT generate scripts or SDK code — it outputs structured spawn instructions that the platform executes natively. Never invoked directly by the user. Never launches without a setup-evaluation PASS.

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。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Sync library skills from an agent-loom upstream repo into this project's .agents/skills while preserving project-local and forked skills. Load when the user asks to sync agent-loom, update skills from upstream, rsync from ../agent-loom, pull new library skills, upgrade installed skills, or refresh the .agents folder without losing custom project skills. Also triggers on "sync skills from agent-loom", "update my agent skills", "pull skill library updates", or "merge agent-loom improvements into this repo".

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。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Instrument a shipped product's AI agents with tracing and observability so you can see what they did, why outputs happened, and what each run cost. Plain-language primer plus free-tier-first backend selection (Langfuse, Phoenix, LangSmith, Braintrust) and OpenTelemetry/OpenInference instrumentation. Load when the user asks to add observability, add tracing, instrument my agents, see what my agent is doing in production, set up Langfuse or Phoenix or LangSmith, debug why my agent gave a bad answer, or track LLM cost per request. Also fires when agent-system-architecture or setup-evaluation requires an observability plan for an agent-chain product. NOT for tracing the coding agent itself — that is run-trace. Precondition for runtime-learning-loop.

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。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Run a structured retrospective after development-phase runs of your product's agents — interview the owner in plain language about what went well and poorly, draft ranked improvement hypotheses, then design and run small n=1/n=2 experiments with pre-declared success criteria, guardrails, stop conditions, and a cost/ROI kill-switch. Load when the user says how did that run go, retro this run, the agent output was bad, what should we improve, draft hypotheses, run a small experiment, or after repeated dev runs of an agentic system produce uneven quality. Priority: output quality over performance over cost, each with diminishing-returns stops. NOT a product A/B test (experimentation), NOT coding-agent harness repair (harness-evolution), NOT production-scale learning (runtime-learning-loop).

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。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

dvy1987 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する