When to Use
Use this skill when:
- Creating a GitHub issue (bug report or feature request)
- Helping a contributor file an issue
- Triaging or approving issues as a maintainer
Critical Rules
- Blank issues are disabled — MUST use a template (bug report or feature request)
- Every issue gets
status:needs-review automatically on creation - A maintainer MUST add
status:approved before any PR can be opened - Questions go to Discussions, not issues
Workflow
1. Search existing issues for duplicates
2. Choose the correct template (Bug Report or Feature Request)
3. Fill in ALL required fields
4. Check pre-flight checkboxes
5. Submit → issue gets status:needs-review automatically
6. Wait for maintainer to add status:approved
7. Only then open a PR linking this issue
Issue Templates
Bug Report
Template: .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml Auto-labels: bug, status:needs-review
Required Fields
| Field | Description |
|---|
| Pre-flight Checks | Checkboxes: no duplicate + understands approval workflow |
| Bug Description | Clear description of the bug |
| Steps to Reproduce | Numbered steps to reproduce |
| Expected Behavior | What should have happened |
| Actual Behavior | What happened instead (include errors/logs) |
| Operating System | Dropdown: macOS, Linux variants, Windows, WSL |
| Engram Version | Output of engram version |
| Agent / Client | Dropdown: Claude Code, OpenCode, Gemini CLI, Cursor, Windsurf, Other |
Optional Fields
| Field | Description |
|---|
| Relevant Logs | Log output (auto-formatted as code block) |
| Additional Context | Screenshots, workarounds, extra info |
Example — Bug Report via CLI
gh issue create --template "bug_report.yml" \
--title "fix(store): duplicate observations on concurrent saves" \
--body "
### Pre-flight Checks
- [x] I have searched existing issues and this is not a duplicate
- [x] I understand this issue needs status:approved before a PR can be opened
### Bug Description
When two agents save observations concurrently, duplicates are created.
### Steps to Reproduce
1. Start two engram instances pointing to the same DB
2. Both save an observation with the same title simultaneously
3. Query observations — duplicates appear
### Expected Behavior
The second save should upsert, not insert a duplicate.
### Actual Behavior
Two identical observations exist with different IDs.
### Operating System
macOS
### Engram Version
0.3.1
### Agent / Client
Claude Code
### Relevant Logs
\`\`\`
UNIQUE constraint failed: observations.title
\`\`\`
"
Feature Request
Template: .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml Auto-labels: enhancement, status:needs-review
Required Fields
| Field | Description |
|---|
| Pre-flight Checks | Checkboxes: no duplicate + understands approval workflow |
| Problem Description | The pain point this feature solves |
| Proposed Solution | How it should work from the user's perspective |
| Affected Area | Dropdown: CLI, MCP Server, TUI, Store, Sync, Skills, Documentation, Other |
Optional Fields
| Field | Description |
|---|
| Alternatives Considered | Other approaches or workarounds |
| Additional Context | Mockups, examples, references |
Example — Feature Request via CLI
gh issue create --template "feature_request.yml" \
--title "feat(cli): add --json flag to mem search" \
--body "
### Pre-flight Checks
- [x] I have searched existing issues and this is not a duplicate
- [x] I understand this issue needs status:approved before a PR can be opened
### Problem Description
When scripting with engram, parsing the human-readable output of mem search is fragile. There's no machine-readable output format.
### Proposed Solution
Add a \`--json\` flag to \`engram mem search\` that outputs results as JSON.
Example:
\`\`\`bash
engram mem search \"auth middleware\" --json
\`\`\`
Expected output:
\`\`\`json
[{\"id\": 42, \"title\": \"JWT auth middleware\", \"type\": \"decision\", ...}]
\`\`\`
### Affected Area
CLI (commands, flags)
### Alternatives Considered
Using \`jq\` to parse the current output, but it's unreliable since the format isn't structured.
"
Label System
Applied Automatically on Issue Creation
| Template | Labels added |
|---|
| Bug Report | bug, status:needs-review |
| Feature Request | enhancement, status:needs-review |
Applied by Maintainers
| Label | When to apply |
|---|
status:approved | Issue accepted for implementation — PRs can now be opened |
priority:high | Critical bug or urgent feature |
priority:medium | Important but not blocking |
priority:low | Nice to have |
Maintainer Approval Workflow
1. New issue arrives with status:needs-review
2. Review the issue — is it valid, clear, and in scope?
3. If YES → add status:approved label
4. If NO → comment with reason, close if needed
5. Contributor can now open a PR linking this issue
Decision Tree
Is it a bug? → Use Bug Report template
Is it a new feature/improvement? → Use Feature Request template
Is it a question? → Use Discussions, NOT issues
Is it a duplicate? → Link to existing issue, close
Commands
# Search existing issues before creating
gh issue list --search "keyword"
# Create bug report
gh issue create --template "bug_report.yml" --title "fix(scope): description"
# Create feature request
gh issue create --template "feature_request.yml" --title "feat(scope): description"
# Maintainer: approve an issue
gh issue edit <number> --add-label "status:approved"
# Maintainer: add priority
gh issue edit <number> --add-label "priority:high"
