Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

issue-triage(问题分类)

用于围绕 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request、分支、提交和代码协作流程提供辅助能力。它适合让 Agent 查询项目状态、整理变更、辅助创建或检查协作事项,并把仓库中的信息转成可执行的下一步。使用时需要区分只读查询和写入操作;涉及创建 PR、修改 Issue、推送分支或访问私有仓库时,应确认 token 权限、目标仓库范围和用户授权。

issue-triage 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 58,150。

总安装 420周安装 17GitHub Stars 55下载 132核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:issue-triage(问题分类)
来源仓库:https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills
仓库路径:skills/issue-triage
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills --skill issue-triage
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills --skill issue-triage

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

issue-triage 用于围绕 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作流程提供辅助能力。适合查询项目状态、整理变更、辅助创建或检查协作事项,并将信息转为可执行步骤。通过 npx skills add 命令从指定仓库安装并使用。

涉及写入操作时需确认 token 权限、目标仓库范围和用户授权。建议区分只读与写入操作,避免误改敏感内容。

来源仓库内路径:skills/issue-triage

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills --skill issue-triage;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

issue-triage 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills --skill issue-triage。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

issue-triage 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

issue-triage 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

issue-triage 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

issue-triage 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 420 次,近一周安装 17 次,下载 132 次,GitHub 55 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

issue-triage 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
issue-triage

问题分类 · 本页

42055需要联网未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Classification System

Every incoming issue receives a primary label and, where relevant, a secondary label from the taxonomy below.

LabelScopeTypical Signals
DefectProduct behaving contrary to specification or expectationError messages, crashes, data rendering incorrectly, regressions, unexpected output
GuidanceCustomer seeking instructions or clarification"How do I...", "Where can I find...", setup questions, configuration help
EnhancementRequest for new or changed functionality"It would help if...", "Can you add...", "Are there plans for..."
BillingCharges, subscriptions, invoicing, pricing, refundsPayment failures, unexpected charges, plan changes, credit requests
AccessLogin, permissions, SSO, user managementLockouts, password resets, role assignments, MFA issues
IntegrationConnectivity with external tools and APIsWebhook failures, OAuth errors, sync problems, API response issues
SecurityThreats, data exposure, compliance inquiriesUnauthorized access, vulnerability disclosures, GDPR/SOC 2 questions
DataIntegrity, migration, import/export concernsMissing records, duplicate entries, failed imports, export formatting
ReliabilitySpeed, uptime, or degraded serviceTimeouts, slow loading, 5xx errors, service unavailability

Choosing the Right Label

  • When a customer describes overlapping concerns (e.g., a defect plus an enhancement wish), the root problem determines the primary label.
  • A broken workflow the customer used to rely on is a Defect, not an Enhancement.
  • A request for the product to work in a new way is an Enhancement, even if the customer frames it as something "not working."
  • Prefer Defect when ambiguous -- investigating a potential bug is safer than dismissing one.

Severity Levels

P1 -- Outage / Emergency

The product is completely unusable, data is at risk, or a security incident is underway. The scope is broad (most or all users impacted) or the consequences are irreversible.

  • Total service unavailability
  • Active data loss, corruption, or unauthorized exposure
  • Security breach in progress
  • Situation is deteriorating without intervention

Response commitment: First reply within 60 minutes. Continuous engagement until mitigated. Status updates every 1-2 hours.

P2 -- Severe Disruption

A key capability is non-functional, a significant user population is blocked, and no practical workaround exists.

  • Core workflow broken but ancillary functions still operate
  • Multiple users or a strategically important account impacted
  • Time-sensitive operations are stalled
  • Reasonable alternatives are not available

Response commitment: First reply within 4 hours. Same-day investigation. Status updates every 4 hours.

P3 -- Moderate Impact

A feature is degraded but usable through an alternate path, or the issue affects a limited audience.

  • Functionality is impaired but a workaround is viable
  • Impact is inconvenient rather than blocking
  • A small group of users is affected
  • No urgent pressure from the customer

Response commitment: First reply within 1 business day. Progress update within 3 business days.

P4 -- Minor / Informational

Cosmetic glitches, general inquiries, enhancement ideas, or problems with well-documented fixes.

  • Visual imperfections with no functional consequence
  • Enhancement suggestions and feedback
  • Routine questions answerable from documentation
  • Issues resolved by following existing instructions

Response commitment: First reply within 2 business days. Resolution at standard pace.

Conditions That Warrant Upgrading Severity

Raise the severity level when any of the following occur:

  • SLA window has elapsed without resolution
  • A pattern emerges: three or more customers reporting the same symptom
  • The customer explicitly invokes executive attention or threatens churn
  • A previously viable workaround ceases to function
  • The blast radius expands (additional users, systems, or data affected)

Routing Guidelines

Direct each issue to the team best positioned to resolve it:

DestinationAppropriate When
Frontline SupportKnown-solution issues, documentation-answerable questions, password resets, simple billing inquiries
Senior / Technical SupportBugs needing investigation, non-trivial configuration, integration debugging, complex account scenarios
EngineeringVerified defects requiring code changes, infrastructure incidents, performance regressions
Product ManagementHigh-demand feature requests, design-level workflow gaps, prioritization decisions
Security TeamVulnerability reports, data exposure concerns, compliance-related inquiries
Finance / BillingRefund approvals, contractual billing disputes, non-standard pricing adjustments

Identifying Duplicate Reports

Before routing a new issue, check for existing overlap:

  1. Symptom search: Look for open issues with matching error text or behavioral descriptions.
  2. Customer history: Verify the same customer has not already filed a related report.
  3. Feature-area scan: Review recent issues in the same product surface.
  4. Known-issue registry: Cross-reference against documented active problems.

When a match is found:

  • Associate the new report with the existing issue.
  • Inform the customer that the problem is tracked and being worked on.
  • Append any fresh details or reproduction context from the new submission.
  • Re-evaluate severity if the additional report widens the impact.

Initial Acknowledgment Patterns

For Defects

Thanks for letting us know about this. I understand that [specific
disruption] is affecting your work.

This has been logged at [severity] and our team is looking into it.
[If a workaround exists: "While we investigate, you can [workaround]."]

Expect an update from us by [timeframe based on SLA].

For Guidance Requests

Good question! [Concise answer or pointer to documentation]

[For multi-step answers: "Here is a walkthrough:"]
[Numbered steps or explanation]

Let me know if this resolves things or if anything else comes up.

For Enhancement Ideas

Appreciate you sharing this idea -- I can see how [desired capability]
would improve your workflow.

I have forwarded this to our product team. I cannot promise a specific
delivery date, but input like this directly shapes our priorities.

[If a partial solution exists: "In the meantime, [alternative approach]
may help."]

For Billing Concerns

I know billing matters need quick resolution. Let me take a look.

[If straightforward: provide resolution details]
[If investigation needed: "I am reviewing your account and will
follow up by [timeframe]."]

For Security Reports

Thank you for raising this -- we treat security matters with the
highest urgency.

This has been routed to our security team for immediate review.
You will hear back by [timeframe].

[If protective steps are advisable: "We recommend [action] in the
meantime."]

Operational Guidelines

  1. Read the entire thread before assigning labels -- later messages frequently alter the picture.
  2. Classify based on the underlying cause, not just the surface symptom.
  3. When severity is uncertain, round up -- downgrading later is far easier than recovering from a missed commitment.
  4. Always check for duplicates and known issues prior to routing.
  5. Attach internal notes summarizing what you have assessed and ruled out, so the next handler can pick up without re-investigation.
  6. Watch for emerging patterns -- repeated low-severity reports on the same topic may signal a systemic problem that deserves elevated attention.

平台分布

Codex

38.97%
按下载量换算51

Claude

29.55%
按下载量换算39

Cursor

18.15%
按下载量换算24

Gemini CLI

9.77%
按下载量换算13

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills