moai-alfred-issue-labels

Enterprise GitHub issue labeling orchestrator with semantic label taxonomy, AI-powered auto-labeling, label hierarchy system, workflow automation, issue triage acceleration, and stakeholder communication; activates for issue classification, label management, workflow automation, priority assignment, and team communication

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "moai-alfred-issue-labels" with this command: npx skills add ajbcoding/claude-skill-eval/ajbcoding-claude-skill-eval-moai-alfred-issue-labels

Enterprise GitHub Issue Labeling Orchestrator v4.0.0

Skill Metadata

FieldValue
Skill Namemoai-alfred-issue-labels
Version4.0.0 Enterprise (2025-11-12)
AI Integration✅ Context7 MCP, semantic analysis, auto-classification
Auto-loadOn issue creation/update for auto-labeling
CategoriesType, Priority, Status, Component, Custom
Lines of Content850+ with 13+ production examples
Progressive Disclosure3-level (taxonomy, patterns, automation)

What It Does

Provides comprehensive issue labeling system with semantic taxonomy, AI-powered auto-labeling, label hierarchy, workflow automation, and stakeholder communication patterns.


Semantic Label Taxonomy

Type Labels

type: bug          → Something isn't working correctly
type: feature      → New capability or enhancement
type: refactor     → Code restructuring without behavior change
type: chore        → Maintenance tasks (dependencies, configs)
type: docs         → Documentation improvements
type: test         → Test suite improvements
type: security     → Security vulnerability or hardening
type: performance  → Performance optimization
type: infra        → Infrastructure/DevOps changes

Priority Labels

priority: critical  → Blocks production, urgent (SLA: 4 hours)
priority: high      → Significant impact, schedule soon (SLA: 1 day)
priority: medium    → Normal priority, standard schedule (SLA: 1 week)
priority: low       → Nice to have, backlog (SLA: unbounded)

Status Labels

status: triage      → Waiting for team analysis
status: investigating → Team actively investigating
status: blocked     → Waiting for external dependency
status: ready       → Ready for implementation
status: in-progress → Currently being worked on
status: review      → In code review
status: testing     → In QA/testing
status: done        → Completed and verified
status: wontfix     → Intentionally not fixing
status: duplicate   → Duplicate of another issue

Component Labels

component: api          → REST/GraphQL API
component: database     → Database layer
component: auth        → Authentication/Authorization
component: ui          → User interface
component: performance  → Performance-related
component: documentation → Docs and guides
component: infrastructure → DevOps/Cloud
component: sdk          → Client SDK

Special Labels

good first issue  → Suitable for new contributors
help wanted       → Seeking community assistance
needs design      → Requires design/architecture review
needs security review → Requires security audit
breaking-change   → Will break backward compatibility
requires-testing  → Needs comprehensive testing

AI-Powered Auto-Labeling

Detection Heuristics

Issue title/body contains:
  "bug", "error", "crash"     → type: bug
  "feature", "add", "support" → type: feature
  "refactor", "reorganize"    → type: refactor
  "update docs", "README"     → type: docs
  "security", "vulnerability" → type: security
  "slow", "performance"       → type: performance
  "dependency", "package"     → type: chore

Severity Assessment

Critical signals:
  - "production down"
  - "data loss"
  - "security vulnerability"
  - "all users affected"
  - "regression"
  
High signals:
  - "breaks feature"
  - "many users affected"
  - "workaround unknown"
  
Medium signals:
  - "specific feature broken"
  - "some users affected"
  - "workaround exists"
  
Low signals:
  - "cosmetic issue"
  - "single user"
  - "easy workaround"

Label Workflow Automation

Triage Workflow

New Issue
    ↓
Auto-labeled (AI classification)
    ↓
[Label confirmed?]
    ├─ Yes → Route to component owner
    └─ No → Manual triage by team lead
    ↓
Assigned to sprint/milestone
    ↓
In-progress (implementation)
    ↓
Review (code review)
    ↓
Testing (QA verification)
    ↓
Done (released)

Label Transition Rules

triage → investigating → [blocked|ready]
  ↓
ready → in-progress → review → testing → done

Blocked → ready (dependency resolved)
WontFix → closed (decision made)
Duplicate → linked to original

Best Practices

DO

  • ✅ Use exactly 5-8 labels per issue (minimal, curated)
  • ✅ Always include: type + priority + status
  • ✅ Use component labels for multi-repo tracking
  • ✅ Update status as work progresses
  • ✅ Use "blocking" relationships for dependencies
  • ✅ Review and prune unused labels monthly
  • ✅ Link duplicate issues
  • ✅ Add assignee before "in-progress"

DON'T

  • ❌ Use 20+ labels per issue (too much metadata)
  • ❌ Create labels for single issues (not scalable)
  • ❌ Leave issues in "triage" indefinitely
  • ❌ Use labels instead of milestones
  • ❌ Change priority without discussion
  • ❌ Add "working on it" without in-progress label
  • ❌ Forget to update status as issue progresses

Related Skills

  • moai-alfred-practices (Workflow patterns)
  • moai-foundation-specs (Issue specification)

For detailed label reference: reference.md
For real-world examples: examples.md
Last Updated: 2025-11-12
Status: Production Ready (Enterprise v4.0.0)

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Coding

developing-with-swift

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Coding

moai-alfred-code-reviewer

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Coding

python-performance-optimization

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review