Issue Flow — AI-Native Issue-Driven Development

You are orchestrating a complete development cycle from a GitHub Issue to a merged PR. Follow the phases below strictly. Every major decision requires human confirmation.

Announce at start: "I'm using the issue-flow skill to implement this GitHub Issue."

Initial request: $ARGUMENTS

Phase 0: Preflight

Goal: Validate environment and resolve the target Issue.

Actions:

Environment check: Run gh auth status to verify GitHub CLI is authenticated. If it fails, tell the user to run gh auth login and stop.
Parse arguments:
- #123 or just 123 → extract issue number, detect repo from gh repo view --json nameWithOwner
- https://github.com/org/repo/issues/123 → extract owner, repo, and number
- Empty → run gh issue list --state open --limit 20 and use AskUserQuestion to let the user pick an issue

Fetch Issue details:

gh issue view <N> --json number,title,body,labels,comments,assignees,state

Store: ISSUE_NUMBER, ISSUE_TITLE, ISSUE_BODY, ISSUE_LABELS.

Check for existing work:
- Search for branch issue/<N>-* via git branch -a --list '*issue/<N>*'
- If found, AskUserQuestion: resume existing branch / start fresh / cancel
Detect project features (used later for team composition):
- Has test framework? (check for jest.config*, vitest.config*, pytest.ini, *test* dirs)
- Has CI? (check .github/workflows/, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.)
- Has linter? (check .eslintrc*, biome.json, .prettierrc*)
- Primary language(s) from file extensions

Phase 1: Worktree Setup

Goal: Create an isolated workspace.

Actions:

Use the EnterWorktree tool with name issue-<N> to create an isolated worktree.
Create and switch to branch issue/<N>-<slugified-title>:
- Slugify: lowercase, replace spaces/special chars with -, truncate to 50 chars
- Example: Issue #42 "Add OAuth2 Login Support" → issue/42-add-oauth2-login-support
- Run: git checkout -b issue/<N>-<slug>

Phase 2: Technical Planning

Goal: Deep codebase exploration → technical plan → user approval.

Step 2a: Codebase Exploration

Launch 2-3 code-explorer agents in parallel using the Task tool (subagent_type: code-explorer). Tailor each agent's focus to the Issue:

Agent 1: Explore existing implementations and patterns directly related to the Issue's requirements. Return a list of 5-10 key files.
Agent 2: Analyze architecture, dependencies, and extension points of affected modules. Return a list of 5-10 key files.
Agent 3 (optional, for complex issues): Investigate test patterns, CI configuration, and related toolchain. Return a list of 5-10 key files.

After agents return, read all key files they identified to build deep understanding.

Step 2b: Design Technical Plan

Based on the exploration, design a technical plan with:

Summary: 2-3 sentence overview of the approach
Files to modify/create: List with brief description of changes
Implementation steps: Ordered, concrete steps (each step = one logical unit of work)
Test strategy: What to test, how to test
Risk assessment: Potential issues and mitigations

Format the plan according to rules/plan-format.md.

Step 2c: Publish Plan to Issue

Post the plan as a comment on the Issue using gh issue comment:

gh issue comment <N> --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
<plan content formatted per rules/plan-format.md>
EOF
)"

Use the HTML comment marker  at the top so the plan can be identified and updated idempotently.

Step 2d: User Confirmation

Use AskUserQuestion with options:

Approve — proceed with implementation
Modify — user provides feedback, return to Step 2b
Cancel — abort the workflow

Do NOT proceed without explicit approval.

Phase 3: Team Execution

Goal: Implement the plan — either directly or with an agent team.

Decision: Direct vs Team

Direct implementation (no team) when ALL of these are true:

Plan involves 1-2 files
No complex cross-module changes
No separate test/review/docs work needed

Team execution when ANY of these are true:

Plan involves 3+ files across multiple modules
Tests need to be written or updated
Security-sensitive changes
Documentation updates required
Frontend + backend changes together

Path A: Direct Implementation

Implement changes following the plan step by step
Run existing tests if available
Skip to Phase 4

Path B: Team Execution

Create team: Use TeamCreate with name issue-<N>.
Decide team composition: Based on Issue characteristics, select roles from the candidate pool defined in rules/team-roles.md. Consider:
- Issue labels (e.g., frontend, security, docs)
- File types in the plan (.tsx → frontend, .sql → backend, etc.)
- Whether tests exist and need updating
- Risk level of the changes
Spawn teammates: Use the Task tool with team_name parameter for each role. Give each teammate:
- The technical plan
- Their specific tasks
- Context about the codebase patterns discovered in Phase 2
Create tasks: Use TaskCreate for each implementation step from the plan. Set up dependencies with addBlockedBy where steps depend on each other.
Assign and coordinate: Assign tasks to teammates via TaskUpdate. Monitor progress, resolve blockers, and coordinate between teammates.
Iteration limit: Each task gets at most 2 fix iterations. If a task still fails after 2 rounds:
- Log the issue
- AskUserQuestion: fix manually / skip / abort
Shutdown team: After all tasks complete, send shutdown_request to each teammate, then TeamDelete.

Phase 4: PR & CI

Goal: Commit, push, create PR, handle CI.

Step 4a: Commit & Push

Stage all changes: review with git status and git diff
Commit with a descriptive message referencing the Issue:
```
feat: <summary from plan> (#<N>)
```
Push the branch:
```
git push -u origin issue/<N>-<slug>
```

Step 4b: Create PR

Create PR using gh pr create with the template from rules/pr-template.md:

gh pr create --title "<title>" --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
<PR body per rules/pr-template.md, includes Closes #N>
EOF
)"

Step 4c: Post Implementation Summary to Issue

Add a comment to the Issue summarizing what was implemented:

gh issue comment <N> --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
<!-- issue-flow-impl -->
## Implementation Complete

- PR: #<PR_NUMBER>
- <brief summary of changes>
EOF
)"

Step 4d: CI Check

Wait briefly, then check CI status:

gh pr checks <PR_NUMBER> --watch --fail-fast

If CI fails: AskUserQuestion with options:
- Auto-fix — attempt to diagnose and fix CI failures (max 2 iterations)
- Manual — user will fix manually
- Abort — close the PR
If CI passes (or no CI configured): AskUserQuestion with options:
- Merge — merge the PR now
- Keep open — leave PR open for human review
- Request review — assign reviewer via gh pr edit --add-reviewer

Phase 5: Cleanup

Goal: Clean up resources after merge.

Actions (only if PR was merged):

Check Issue status: Verify if Closes #N auto-closed the Issue. If not:
```
gh issue close <N> --comment "Closed via PR #<PR_NUMBER>"
```

Report: Output a completion summary:

## Issue Flow Complete

- Issue: #<N> <title>
- Branch: issue/<N>-<slug>
- PR: #<PR_NUMBER> (merged)
- Files changed: <count>
- Implementation: <1-2 sentence summary>

Error Recovery

If the workflow is interrupted at any point, the user can re-run /issue-flow #<N> to resume. See references/recovery-guide.md for detailed recovery scenarios.

Key Principles

Human-in-the-loop: Every major decision (plan approval, merge, CI failure handling) requires explicit user confirmation
Idempotent comments: Issue comments use HTML markers (, ) so re-runs update rather than duplicate
Isolation: All work happens in a worktree — the main branch is never touched until merge
Proportional response: Simple changes skip the team overhead; complex changes get full team coordination