Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索执行命令clawhub未标认证来源可访问clear审计提醒

issue-to-pr问题到公关

Agent Skill

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。

总安装

3,525

周安装

144

GitHub Stars

1

下载量

1,129
OpenClaw

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

MIT-0

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

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-to-pr(问题到公关)
来源仓库:https://github.com/4ydx3906/issue-to-pr
安装命令:
openclaw skills install issue-to-pr
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install issue-to-pr

简介

端到端自动修复 GitHub Issue:读取问题→分析代码→提交 PR。

  • 适用于简单 Bug 修复与新功能最小化实现的高效处理场景。
  • 内置代码风格检查与安全扫描确保提交质量达标。issue-to-pr 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。
  • 涉及敏感分支操作前务必获得项目负责人明确授权许可。
  • 复杂变更建议拆分为多个小 PR 便于代码审查与合并管理。

SKILL.md

name
issue-to-pr
description
issue-to-pr — Automatically fix GitHub issues end-to-end: reads the issue, analyzes repository code, implements a fix, and submits a pull request. Use when the user provides a GitHub issue URL, mentions fixing a GitHub issue, or uses the /fix-issue command. Supports URLs in the format https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{number}.
version
1.3.0
author
4yDX3906
tags
["git", "github", "automation", "issue-fix", "pull-request"]
homepage
https://github.com/4yDX3906/issue-to-pr
metadata
clawdbot
emoji
🔧
requires
env
[]
files
["scripts/install.sh"]

issue-to-pr — Agent Skill

You are an autonomous agent that reads a GitHub issue, understands the problem, locates the relevant code, implements a fix, and prepares everything for review. Follow the phases below in order, using the checklist to track progress.


Progress Checklist

Use this checklist to track your progress through the workflow:

  • [ ] Phase 1: Parse Issue Reference
  • [ ] Phase 2: Fetch Issue Details
  • [ ] Phase 3: Clone or Locate Repository
  • [ ] Phase 4: Analyze the Issue
  • [ ] Phase 5: Implement the Fix
  • [ ] Phase 6: Verify the Fix
  • [ ] Phase 7: Present Changes & Get Confirmation
  • [ ] Phase 8: Submit Pull Request (User-Approved)

Phase 1: Parse Issue Reference

Extract the GitHub issue reference from the user's input.

Supported input formats:

FormatExample
Full URLhttps://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123
Shorthandowner/repo#123
Issue number only#123 or 123 (requires being in a git repo)

Parsing logic

  1. Full URL: Scan for https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{number} and extract components directly.
  2. Shorthand: Match {owner}/{repo}#{number} pattern.
  3. Issue number only: If only a number (or #number) is provided:

- Run git remote -v to detect the current repository's GitHub remote. - Parse owner and repo from the remote URL (supports both HTTPS and SSH formats). - If not in a git repo or no GitHub remote is found, ask the user for the full URL.

  1. If no valid reference is found, ask the user to provide a valid GitHub issue URL.
  2. Confirm the parsed values before proceeding:

> Parsed issue: {owner}/{repo}#{number}


Phase 2: Fetch Issue Details

Retrieve the full issue content including title, body, labels, and comments.

Strategy A: Use gh CLI (preferred)

Run in the terminal:

gh issue view {number} --repo {owner}/{repo} --comments

If the command succeeds, extract from the output:

  • Title
  • Body / Description
  • Labels
  • Comments (may contain important context, reproductions, or workarounds)

Strategy B: Fallback to fetch_content

If gh is not installed or the command fails:

  1. Use the fetch_content tool with the issue URL: https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{number}
  2. Parse the fetched page content to extract:

- Issue title and body - Any referenced file paths, error messages, or stack traces - Comments from maintainers or the reporter

Extract Key Information

From the issue content, identify and note:

FieldDescription
Problem summaryOne-sentence description of the bug or feature gap
Reproduction stepsHow to trigger the issue
Expected behaviorWhat should happen
Actual behaviorWhat actually happens
Error messagesStack traces, log output, error codes
File path hintsAny files, modules, or functions mentioned
Related issues/PRsCross-references that provide context

Phase 3: Clone or Locate Repository

Ensure you have local access to the repository source code.

Step 1: Check current workspace

git remote -v 2>/dev/null
  • If the output contains github.com/{owner}/{repo} (or github.com:{owner}/{repo}), you are already in the correct repo. Skip to Step 3.

Step 2: Clone if needed

If the current workspace is not the target repository, clone it:

gh repo clone {owner}/{repo} /tmp/{repo} 2>/dev/null || git clone https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}.git /tmp/{repo}

Then inform the user about the clone location.

Step 2.5: Change into the repository directory

After locating or cloning the repository, cd into the repository directory before running any git commands:

cd {repo_path}

Step 2.7: Check push permission and prepare fork if needed

Determine if you have push access to the repository:

gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/collaborators/$(gh api user --jq '.login') --silent 2>/dev/null
has_push=$?

If has_push is non-zero (no write access), fork the repository now:

gh repo fork {owner}/{repo} --remote-name fork --clone=false

This ensures the fork is ready before creating the fix branch. Note which remote to push to:

  • If you have write access: push to origin
  • If you forked: push to fork

Step 3: Ensure correct branch

First, detect the default branch:

# Detect the default branch (prefer GitHub API, fallback to git)
default_branch=$(gh api repos/{owner}/{repo} --jq '.default_branch' 2>/dev/null)
if [ -z "$default_branch" ]; then
  default_branch=$(git symbolic-ref --short refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's|^origin/||')
fi
if [ -z "$default_branch" ]; then
  default_branch="main"
fi

Then check out the default branch and pull latest changes:

git checkout $default_branch
git pull --ff-only

Check if the fix branch already exists:

if git show-ref --verify --quiet refs/heads/fix/issue-{number} 2>/dev/null || \
   git show-ref --verify --quiet refs/remotes/origin/fix/issue-{number} 2>/dev/null; then
  echo "Branch fix/issue-{number} already exists"
fi

If the branch already exists, ask the user whether to:

  • Reuse the existing branch and continue from where it left off
  • Recreate the branch from the latest default branch (deletes existing work)
  • Rename to fix/issue-{number}-v2 (or incrementing suffix)

Create the fix branch:

git checkout -b fix/issue-{number}

Phase 4: Analyze the Issue

Systematically locate the problem in the codebase.

4.1 Keyword Search

Use the error messages, file paths, and function names from the issue to search:

  • Use grep_code to search for error strings, function names, or variable names mentioned in the issue.
  • Use search_codebase for semantic searches when the issue describes behavior rather than specific code.
  • Use search_file to find files by name if the issue mentions specific filenames.

4.2 Understand the Context

Once you find candidate files:

  1. Read the relevant files to understand the current implementation.
  2. Trace the code path that leads to the reported bug.
  3. Check related tests to understand expected behavior.
  4. Review recent git history for the affected files if useful:
   git log --oneline -10 -- {file_path}

4.3 Root Cause Analysis

Before writing any code, produce a structured analysis:

### Analysis Result
- **Root Cause:** {Why the bug occurs}
- **Affected Files:** {file1 (function_name), file2 (function_name)}
- **Fix Strategy:** {What the minimal change should be}
- **Risk Assessment:** Low / Medium / High
- **Estimated Changes:** {N files, ~M lines}

This structured output will be referenced in Phase 5 (implementation) and Phase 7 (summary).

4.4 Scope Assessment

Before proceeding to implementation, assess the scope:

  • Multiple sub-problems: If the issue describes multiple distinct problems, focus on the most critical one first. Note remaining items for follow-up issues or separate PRs.
  • Monorepo detection: Check for workspaces in package.json, pnpm-workspace.yaml, lerna.json, or similar workspace config files. If found, narrow your search scope to the relevant package/workspace.

Phase 5: Implement the Fix

Apply the minimal code change to resolve the issue.

Guidelines

  • Minimal diff: Change only what is necessary to fix the issue. Do not refactor unrelated code.
  • Consistency: Follow the existing code style, naming conventions, and patterns in the project.
  • No new dependencies unless absolutely required and justified.
  • Use the search_replace tool to make precise edits.

If Multiple Files Need Changes

  1. Plan the full set of changes before starting.
  2. Apply changes one file at a time.
  3. After each file change, verify there are no syntax errors using get_problems.

Phase 6: Verify the Fix

Validate that the fix works and doesn't break anything.

6.1 Detect Project Type and Test Runner

Look for common indicators:

FileLikely runner
package.jsonnpm test or npx jest or npx vitest
Cargo.tomlcargo test
go.modgo test ./...
pyproject.toml / setup.pypytest
Makefilemake test
pom.xmlmvn test
build.gradle./gradlew test

6.2 Run Tests

# Run the full test suite or scoped tests related to the changed files
{test_command}
  • If tests pass, proceed to Phase 7.
  • If tests fail, analyze the failure, adjust the fix, and re-run.

6.2.1 No Test Framework Detected

If no test runner or test files are found:

  1. Run static analysis using get_problems on all changed files to catch syntax errors and type issues.
  2. Manually verify the fix by reading through the changed code paths.
  3. Note in the PR that automated tests were not available:

> No automated test framework was detected in this project. The fix was verified via static analysis and manual code review.

6.3 Lint / Format Check (if available)

Check if the project has lint or format tools configured, and run them:

# Examples
npm run lint 2>/dev/null
cargo clippy 2>/dev/null
go vet ./... 2>/dev/null

Fix any lint issues introduced by your changes.


Phase 7: Present Changes & Get Confirmation

Present the fix to the user and wait for explicit approval before proceeding.

7.1 Show Fix Summary

## Fix Summary for {owner}/{repo}#{number}

**Issue:** {issue_title}
**Root Cause:** {brief explanation}
**Changes:**
- `{file_path_1}`: {what was changed and why}
- `{file_path_2}`: {what was changed and why}

7.2 Show Diff

Display the actual code changes so the user can review them:

git diff

Highlight the key modifications and explain their impact.

7.3 Wait for User Confirmation

Ask the user:

Would you like me to submit these changes as a Pull Request? If anything needs adjustment, let me know.
  • If the user approves, proceed to Phase 8.
  • If the user requests changes, revise the fix (return to Phase 5) and re-present.

Phase 8: Submit Pull Request (User-Approved)

Only execute this phase after the user has approved the changes in Phase 7.

Step 1: Stage and Commit

git add -A
git commit -m "fix: {short description} (#{number})

{Detailed explanation of what was wrong and how this commit fixes it.}

Closes #{number}"

Step 2: Push the branch

Push to the appropriate remote based on the permission check from Phase 3:

# If you have write access (push succeeded in Phase 3 check):
git push origin fix/issue-{number}

# If you forked the repository in Phase 3:
git push fork fix/issue-{number}

Step 2.5: Check for repository PR template

pr_template=""
for f in .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md .github/pull_request_template.md docs/pull_request_template.md PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md; do
  if [ -f "$f" ]; then
    pr_template="$f"
    break
  fi
done

If a PR template is found, use it as the base for the PR body and fill in the relevant sections. Otherwise, use the default template below.

Step 3: Create Pull Request

Default PR Body Template

## Summary

Fixes #{number}.

### Problem
{Brief problem description from issue analysis}

### Solution
{Brief solution description from fix implementation}

### Changes
- {change 1}
- {change 2}

### Testing
- [x] Existing tests pass
- [x] {Any additional verification performed}

---
<sub>🔧 Generated by [issue-to-pr](https://github.com/4yDX3906/issue-to-pr)</sub>
gh pr create \
  --repo {owner}/{repo} \
  --title "fix: {short description}" \
  --body "$pr_body" \
  --base {default_branch} \
  --head {head_ref}
{head_ref} is fix/issue-{number} for direct push or {your_username}:fix/issue-{number} for fork push.
Tip: Add the --draft flag to create a draft PR if the fix needs further review before marking as ready.

Step 4: Verify & Report

  • Capture the PR URL from the gh pr create output.
  • Report to the user:

> ✅ PR created successfully: {PR_URL} > Please review the PR page for any CI checks or reviewer feedback.

  • If creation fails, show the full error and provide the manual command as a fallback.

Fallback: Manual Instructions

If the user declines auto-submission or any step fails, present:

  1. Suggested commit message:
   fix: {short description} (#{number})

   {Detailed explanation}

   Closes #{number}
  1. PR creation command:
   gh pr create \
     --title "fix: {short description}" \
     --body "..." \
     --base {default_branch}
  1. Recommend next steps:

- Review the diff: git diff {default_branch} - Commit and push the changes - Create the PR and verify CI passes


Error Handling

Handle these common failure scenarios gracefully:

ScenarioAction
gh CLI not installedFall back to git clone and fetch_content. Suggest installing gh: brew install gh or see https://cli.github.com
gh auth not configuredPrompt user to run gh auth login and retry
Repository is private / 403Inform the user that authentication is required and guide them to authenticate
Issue not found / 404Double-check the URL and ask the user to verify
No write access to /tmpClone to the workspace directory instead
Tests fail after fixAnalyze failure output, revise the fix, and re-verify
Cannot determine root causePresent findings so far and ask the user for guidance
Large / complex issueBreak the issue into sub-tasks, fix the most critical part first, and note remaining work
git push permission deniedAuto-fork the repository and push to fork
gh pr create failsShow error details and provide manual command
User's gh not authenticatedPrompt user to run gh auth login first
Branch already exists on remoteAsk user whether to force-push or create a new branch name
PR already exists for this branchShow existing PR URL and ask whether to update
No test framework foundRun static analysis with get_problems, verify manually, and note in PR
Issue contains multiple problemsFix the most critical problem first; note remaining items as follow-up
Fix branch already existsAsk user to reuse, recreate, or rename the branch

Notes

  • Local operations: All code analysis and modification happens locally. Only standard Git and GitHub API operations (clone, push, PR creation) send data to GitHub.
  • Authentication: Uses your existing gh CLI credentials. No additional credentials are stored.
  • User consent required: The agent will not push code or create PRs without explicit user approval in Phase 7.

适合场景

01

OpenClaw 用户查找和安装 Skill 时

02

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

03

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

04

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

OpenClaw

91.3%
按下载量换算1,031

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

可疑

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 openclaw skills install issue-to-pr 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

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。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills