Files

Defame1297 062ca47a18 docs: correct claims left stale by today's apm-only commits

A five-agent review of today's seven commits found no executable
regressions and no dangling references, but a set of documents still
asserting, in present tense, machinery that ADR-0024 and its commits
removed. This corrects them in place, keeping the original text as the
historical record wherever the repo's amendment convention applies.

LESSONS.md: the 2026-06-21 entry prescribed a `claude plugin validate`
sweep that now fails on every plugin, so it is marked superseded with
the surviving gates named. The 2026-08-09 entry gained a recurrence
note: today's manifest deletion broke apm's MCP propagation exactly as
that lesson describes, and its prescribed repo-local grep could not
have caught it, because `plugin_parser.py` ships in the apm toolchain
installed outside this repository.

ADR-0019, ADR-0011 and ADR-0021: amendments extended to passages the
earlier correction passes stepped over -- a dead native-consumer guard,
Consequences bullets still calling for a `plugins/gitea/.mcp.json` that
must not be recreated, and a drift-gate list naming a deleted script.
ADR-0021's list is down to one gate, not two: `apm audit --ci` never
read `description` and was never a drift gate.

architecture.md and enrichments.md: the self-containment constraint is
restated on its live source, the agentskills.io APM package-mode spec,
rather than on Claude Code's plugin cache-install, which ADR-0024
consequence 6 pins as a superseded rationale. releasing.md's pointer to
the deleted sync script is rewritten as history.

tests/run-bats.sh and scripts/lib/batch-run.sh: comment-only. The
`.claude/skills/` exclusion comment claimed a duplication that is not
live yet; apm does not strip `tests/`, and the deployed tree is empty
of them only because the lockfile still resolves the six dependencies
to a pre-ADR-0024 commit carrying the flat mirror. The exclusion is
correct but forward-looking, and now says so.

SIMPLIFICATION-AUDIT.md: reconciled against what the commits actually
did. Two closed findings recorded conclusions that ADR-0024 reversed
hours later; findings 1, 3, 31 and 35 carried prescriptions voided the
same day; finding 28 is now recorded as having moved backwards, with
docs/adr/ measured at +336 lines over the day. The section 1 headline
table is re-measured at a6434e0 and labelled with its basis. The
ADR-0012 contradiction between finding 2b and section 8 is resolved in
2b's favour after reading the ADR: only finding 24 is governed by it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YR2CjVumUbEGWcMikcoXBD

2026-09-14 19:50:23 +00:00

5.2 KiB

Raw Blame History

topic, source_keys

topic

source_keys

enrichments

gitea-mcp-repo

gitea-mcp-slim-go

context7-websites-gitea

Create-flow enrichments

Closes out the four enrichments deferred from issue #6 comment #848. Run in this order before the issue_write method: "create" call in SKILL.md's create dispatch: labels → milestone → assignee → dependency link. Each step is independent and skippable on its own — a missing milestone fit doesn't block label inference, and so on — but this is the order that lets later steps use context established earlier (e.g. the inferred Kind/* label can inform which milestone plausibly fits).

Cross-skill composition note: none of the steps below read gitea-labels-milestones's reference files directly by path. A skill is a self-contained unit: a file reference that leaves this skill's own directory is outside what the APM package-mode spec permits, and there is no cross-skill file-sharing mechanism to reach for instead — such a path breaks once installed. Instead, compose gitea-labels-milestones as a skill: describe the task to it (its own SKILL.md and description trigger it) and consume the resolved IDs it returns.

1. Label inference

Delegate the entire signal-to-label mapping to gitea-labels-milestones — this skill does not duplicate the Kind/*/Priority/*/Status/* taxonomy table.

Compose gitea-labels-milestones to resolve labels for the issue being created: give it the draft title/body and ask it to infer and resolve applicable labels (it calls label_read method: "list_repo_labels" internally and runs its own inference procedure).
Take back the resolved label IDs (and which scope groups, if any, need replacing — not relevant yet on a brand-new issue, since there's nothing to replace).
If gitea-labels-milestones reports low confidence and omits a Kind/* label, pass no Kind/* ID rather than guessing one yourself. Priority/Medium is the one label its own inference procedure defaults to when no urgency signal is present — that's expected, not a gap.
Pass the resulting label IDs to issue_write's labels parameter (omit the parameter entirely if the resolved list is empty).

2. Milestone assignment on create

Compose gitea-labels-milestones to list open milestones (it calls milestone_read method: "list" state: "open" internally).
Compare the issue's inferred scope (title, body, and any Kind/* label from step 1) against each open milestone's title/description. Assign a milestone only when the fit is clear — a milestone literally named for the feature area, or one whose description explicitly covers this kind of work. A milestone that's merely "the current one" without a clear scope match is not a confident fit.
If a milestone clearly fits, pass its numeric ID (never the title) as issue_write's milestone parameter. issue_write's milestone field only accepts the ID — see references/issues.md.
If no milestone clearly fits, omit milestone entirely. Guessing a milestone assignment is worse than leaving it unset — an issue can always be milestoned later, but a wrong milestone assignment pollutes that milestone's issue count and scope.

3. Assignee on create — the `get_me` workaround

issue_write accepts assignees: [<login>], but there is no way to discover the current user's own login to self-assign: get_me requires the read:user scope, and this repo's Gitea MCP token is scoped to write:issue + write:repository only, with no read:user grant. This is a hard capability gap, not something to work around with a guess.

Workaround: support an optional user-configured default assignee login, supplied one of two ways:

A config value the caller or orchestrator (e.g. gitea-workflow) already resolved and passes in when invoking this skill.
A login explicitly stated in the conversation ("assign this to alice") — use that login directly, no lookup needed, since Gitea accepts a login string without requiring you to resolve an ID first.

If neither is available, omit assignees entirely. Do not guess a login, do not fail the create over a missing assignee, and do not attempt get_me/search_users as a fallback — both are blocked by the same scope gap and will only produce a confusing secondary error.

4. Dependency-linking convention

gitea-mcp has no native issue-dependency field (no "blocks"/"blocked by" relationship in the API surface this skill has access to). The convention is to write "Depends on #N" as a line in the issue body.

This is not just a text convention with no effect — Gitea auto-renders #N (and !N for PRs) as a real clickable cross-reference with no separate API call, a documented platform behavior (see references/sources.md for the backing research). This works because issues and PRs share one repo-scoped number space. Use the bare #N form for same-repo dependencies; use owner/repo#N for a dependency in a different repo.

When creating an issue that depends on another, append a line like:

Depends on #42

to the body before calling issue_write method: "create". No separate field or follow-up call is involved — the rendering happens automatically once the body is saved.

5.2 KiB Raw Blame History