Defame1297
38f1ba4e03
Claude Code's (and Copilot's) native plugin installer has zero awareness of .apm/ nesting -- it convention-scans only flat skills/, agents/, commands/, hooks.json at each plugin's root. Confirmed via strings on the installed claude binary and live installs of git@holocron/gitea@holocron/kyberforge@ holocron, all reporting Skills(0) Agents(0) Hooks(0) post ADR-0015's apm conversion. Root cause (apm_cli/core/plugin_manifest.py): apm's plugin.json compiler deliberately strips skills/agents/commands keys, assuming the host already auto-discovers those convention directories -- it has no model of .apm/ being host-visible at all. Separately, apm's own bundle exporter (apm_cli/bundle/plugin_exporter.py, behind `apm pack --format plugin`) implements the correct .apm/ -> flat mapping, but only ever targeted build/<name>-<version>/, a path nothing in marketplace.json's source: points at. scripts/sync-plugin-content.sh wraps that bundle exporter and copies its agents/, skills/, commands/, instructions/, extensions/, and merged hooks.json back into each plugin's own root as a second tracked compiled-output category -- same governance status as .claude-plugin/plugin.json: generated from .apm/, never hand-edited. tests/ subdirectories are excluded from the mirror (dev fixtures, not host-visible runtime content; several hardcode a relative repo-root walk-up sized for the .apm/-nested depth, which breaks when duplicated one level shallower). Applied for real across all 6 plugins and verified two ways: `claude plugin validate --strict` passes on every real plugin directory, and a live `claude --plugin-dir <path> -p "list skills/agents"` behavioral test confirms content is now actually discovered. Also, from the same issue #90 review round: - scripts/check-manifests.sh pointed at each plugin's root-level plugin.json (checking skills/hooks/mcpServers/agents pointer fields) -- that file was a stale near-duplicate of .claude-plugin/plugin.json nothing else read or wrote, now deleted across all 6 plugins. check-manifests.sh is rewritten to validate .claude-plugin/plugin.json instead, and drops the pointer-field checks entirely (nothing to check -- those fields are correctly absent by design). Content-presence drift is now check-plugin-content-sync's job, a new pre-push hook wired in .pre-commit-config.yaml. docs/adr/0017 records the root cause and decision in full, including two rejected alternatives (patching plugin.json's path fields directly -- apm's compiler strips them on every run; pointing marketplace.json at apm pack's build/ output -- a version-suffixed non-source directory nothing can install from without an extra build step). ADR-0015 and CONTEXT.md are updated to point at it. Refs: #90
75 lines
5.0 KiB
Markdown
75 lines
5.0 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: gitea-workflow
|
|
|
|
description: >
|
|
Use when a human wants a general or ambiguous Gitea status check or isn't sure which Gitea
|
|
domain skill applies — a no-args check-in ("what's going on in the repo", "any updates?"),
|
|
a bare-numbered reference that could be an issue or a PR ("what's the status of #42", "what's
|
|
happening with #17"), or a request to discover which Gitea capability handles a task. This is
|
|
the human-facing entry point and router for the Gitea integration — it replaces the old flat
|
|
`/gitea` invocation (now `/gitea-workflow`) and composes the six domain skills
|
|
(`gitea-issues`, `gitea-labels-milestones`, `gitea-prs`, `gitea-branches`, `gitea-files`,
|
|
`gitea-releases`) rather than calling any Gitea MCP tool directly. Do not use this skill when
|
|
the domain is already known and unambiguous — invoke the matching domain skill directly instead
|
|
(e.g. "create an issue" → `gitea-issues`, "merge PR #10" → `gitea-prs`, "cut a release" →
|
|
`gitea-releases`). Do not use for local git operations with no Gitea component (use
|
|
`git-workflow`).
|
|
|
|
compatibility: Requires Gitea MCP server configured with a token; delegates all calls to the six
|
|
domain skills, which in turn require write:issue and write:repository scopes at minimum.
|
|
|
|
metadata:
|
|
category: integration
|
|
version: "0.1.0"
|
|
source_keys:
|
|
- gitea-mcp-repo
|
|
- gitea-mcp-slim-go
|
|
- context7-websites-gitea
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Gotchas
|
|
|
|
- **This skill never calls a Gitea MCP tool itself.** Every read or write goes through one of the six domain skills. If a request needs a raw `mcp__gitea__*` call that no domain skill exposes, that's a gap in a domain skill, not something to patch here.
|
|
- **Issues and PRs share one number space** — a bare number like `#42` could be either. Never guess from context clues alone; resolve it with a real call (see Step 2) before dispatching.
|
|
- **A 404 on the resolution call doesn't necessarily mean the number doesn't exist.** Gitea hides permission errors as not-found (documented in `gitea-issues`' Gotchas). If resolution 404s unexpectedly, say so and suggest checking token scope rather than reporting "no such issue or PR."
|
|
|
|
## Step 1 — Default status view (no args)
|
|
|
|
When invoked with no specific request, give a status check-in:
|
|
|
|
1. Invoke `gitea-issues` to list open issues (`state: "open"`).
|
|
2. Invoke `gitea-prs` to list open PRs (`state: "open"`).
|
|
3. Run both in parallel — they're independent reads.
|
|
4. Report as two sections, "Open Issues" and "Open Pull Requests", each as a compact list (number, title). This preserves the original flat `/gitea` skill's default behavior.
|
|
|
|
## Step 2 — Resolve an ambiguous number
|
|
|
|
When the user references a bare number without saying "issue" or "PR" (e.g. "what's going on with #42"):
|
|
|
|
1. Invoke `gitea-issues` to run `issue_read method: "get"` on that number.
|
|
2. Check the response's `is_pull` field:
|
|
- `true` → it's a PR. Invoke `gitea-prs` for full PR detail (status, diff, reviews as appropriate to the request) and present that instead.
|
|
- `false` or absent → it's an issue. Present the issue detail already retrieved.
|
|
3. If the resolution call 404s, don't conclude the number doesn't exist — report the 404 and suggest verifying token scope (`write:issue`) per `gitea-issues`' Gotchas, since permission errors are hidden as not-found in Gitea.
|
|
|
|
Never dispatch to `gitea-issues` or `gitea-prs` based on guessing from phrasing alone ("that sounds like a bug" is not evidence) — always resolve first.
|
|
|
|
## Step 3 — Route explicit but domain-unclear requests
|
|
|
|
For requests that name a capability but not obviously which skill owns it, use this index:
|
|
|
|
| Skill | Covers |
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
| `gitea-issues` | List/read/create/update issues, comments, search across issues and PRs. Composes `gitea-labels-milestones` for label/milestone resolution. |
|
|
| `gitea-labels-milestones` | Label and milestone CRUD, label inference from conversation context, resolving names/titles to the numeric IDs writes require. Cross-cutting — used by both `gitea-issues` and `gitea-prs`. |
|
|
| `gitea-prs` | List/read/create/update/merge PRs, code reviews. Composes `gitea-labels-milestones` the same way `gitea-issues` does. |
|
|
| `gitea-branches` | Branch list/create/delete, plus commit history (list commits, get a single commit by SHA). |
|
|
| `gitea-files` | Read/write/delete individual files, list a directory, walk the full repo tree. |
|
|
| `gitea-releases` | Release and tag CRUD — draft/prerelease flags, release notes, semver tags. |
|
|
|
|
If a request clearly names one of these (e.g. "create a milestone" → `gitea-labels-milestones`, "read this file from the repo" → `gitea-files`), invoke that skill directly rather than routing through here. Use this table only when the user or an upstream agent is unsure which skill applies.
|
|
|
|
## Step 4 — Report
|
|
|
|
Present results in plain language. For the status view, two labeled sections. For a resolved ambiguous number, say which domain it turned out to be before showing detail ("That's a pull request:" / "That's an issue:"). For routing, name the skill and hand off — don't duplicate its output format, let it report.
|