oh-my-issues
Organizes a list of issues in a system. It groups similar problems and helps create a plan to solve them.
What it does
This tool organizes a list of programming project issues. It groups similar problems with the same root cause into a single 'master plan'. Then, it closes the original issues with a standardized comment and creates a bundle of fixes to resolve them all at once.
When to use it
- ✓When there are many duplicate issues or symptoms of the same defect.
- ✓When you need to organize, group, or consolidate issues.
- ✓When you want to create an action plan or roadmap from the issues.
Example of what to ask your AI
“Organize these 50 issues into groups based on root cause and create a master plan for each group.”
Want more? Open the sections below.
How to use
The easiest way: copy the message below and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any AI. It reads the skill and follows the instructions.
Skill link
Ready-to-paste message
How it works
The tool reads all issues and their comments to understand the actual cause. It groups issues that can be resolved with a single architectural change and creates a 'master plan' for each group.
Installation
Easiest way: copy the skill link and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor asking it to follow the instructions.
In the terminal (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor), in your project folder:
npx skills add thedotmack/claude-mem --skill oh-my-issuesOr download just the file:
curl -L https://raw.githubusercontent.com/thedotmack/claude-mem/main/plugin/skills/oh-my-issues/SKILL.md -o SKILL.mdTechnical content (original SKILL.md)
Original text by the author, straight from GitHub.
oh-my-issues
Turn an issue backlog into a roadmap. Issues are symptom data, not units of work — the unit of work is the architectural defect that produces them. The end state is open issues == open plans, 1:1.
Core principle
Stop closing issues one at a time. Group symptoms that share a single architectural fix into a cluster, give the cluster one canonical home (a plan-master issue + a plans/0X-*.md design doc), close every child with a standardized redirect, and ship one PR per cluster that closes all children atomically. New incoming bugs get appended to the matching master as a "Round N" comment, not opened as new tracked issues.
This compounds three ways: architectural fixes retire whole symptom families, the plan's test matrix institutionalizes prevention in CI, and standardized triage makes residual inflow cheap.
When to use
- The repo has 20+ open issues and many feel like duplicates or platform-specific symptoms of the same defect.
- The user asks to "triage", "consolidate", "cluster", "dedupe", "group", or "make a plan from" the issue list.
- A new bug is filed and the user wants to know whether it belongs to existing work.
- The user wants to ship a focused PR that resolves a cluster of related issues.
When NOT to use
- Fewer than ~15 open issues: just close them.
- Issues are genuinely independent (no shared root causes): one fix per issue is correct.
- The repo lacks
plans/discipline and the user does not want to introduce one — propose first, do not impose.
Three modes
Mode 1: Cluster pass (initial reduction)
Use when the backlog has never been consolidated. Goal: go from N issues to N_plans masters in one operation.
- Read everything in full. Fetch every open issue's body and its comment thread — not just titles. Surface-level grouping fails without full text, and reproduction steps, linked duplicates, and diagnostic output often live in comments rather than the original body. See "GitHub CLI primitives" below for the correct paginated listing + per-issue comment fetch (a single
gh issue listcall does not return comment bodies). - Cluster by root cause, not by surface. The clustering question is would one architectural change retire all of these? — not do these mention the same word?. "Windows" is a surface; "spawn contract violated by host shells" is a root cause. Two issues with different surfaces can share a cluster (e.g. an env-var leak in two different code paths sharing one missing env-isolation boundary).
- Name each cluster as an architectural problem. Title format:
[plan-XX] <Architectural Defect> — <one-line scope>. Example:[plan-02] Spawn-Contract Templating — canonical ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT} resolution across all hosts. The title must imply a fix, not a topic. - Open one master issue per cluster with a body that lists: the architectural defect, the children (by issue number), the fix sequence, and a required test matrix (host × IDE × shell, etc.) that prevents regression.
- Mirror each master as
plans/0X-<slug>.mdin the repo. The issue is the public tracker; the doc is the design. They reference each other. - Close every child with the standardized redirect comment (see below) and state
not planned. - Verify end state:
gh issue list --state openreturns exactly the masters and nothing else.
Target shape for ~100 issues: 4–8 masters. More than 10 means you're clustering by surface; fewer than 3 means clusters are too broad to ship as one PR each.
Mode 2: Triage (new incoming bug, steady state)
Use when a new issue is filed after consolidation is in place. Goal: never let the issue list re-accumulate.
- Read the new issue's body in full.
- Pattern-match the symptom against existing plan masters. For each open master, ask: would the fix described here also fix this new bug? If yes → it belongs to that plan.
- If a match exists, post a "Round N" comment on the master that:
- Names the new child by number
- Describes the symptom in one line
- Sketches the concrete fix (1–3 lines, e.g. "guard with
case "$_SH" in /*.exe|"") _SH=bash ;; esac") - Adds any new test-matrix cell the bug exposes
- Close the child with the standardized redirect comment,
not planned. - If no match exists and the bug is genuinely novel: open a new plan master +
plans/0X-*.md. Resist this. Most bugs are children of existing plans.
Mode 3: Bundle (ship the cluster)
…
FAQ
What is a 'master plan'?
It's a main issue that represents a group of related problems. It describes the root cause and the solution for all issues in that group.
Why group issues instead of fixing them one by one?
Fixing one issue at a time can be slow. Grouping and fixing the root cause of multiple issues at once is more efficient and prevents similar problems from reappearing.
What happens to the original issues when they are grouped?
They are closed with a standardized comment that points to the corresponding 'master plan', indicating they were resolved as part of a larger fix.
Details
Original description by the author
Cluster a GitHub issue backlog by root cause into a small set of plan-master issues, redirect children with a standardized comment, and bundle architectural-fix PRs that close clusters atomically. Use when an issue tracker has accumulated dozens of reports that share underlying defects, when asked to triage / consolidate / cluster / dedupe issues, when asked to build a plan series or roadmap from
repo: thedotmack/claude-mem
Popularity
- GitHub stars
- 101k
- Ranking position
- #816
- License
- Apache-2.0
- Updated
- 10/16/2026
Comments
- …
More skills from this repository
Agent Cost Report
Has your agent generate detailed cost reports for its activities. Shows how much was spent on tokens and services.
thedotmack/claude-mem
claude-mem-install
Helps your agent set up Claude-Mem in different environments. Allows choosing between local or remote workers and configuring observation.
thedotmack/claude-mem
mem-search
Lets your agent search past memories. Useful for recalling previous solutions or work from old sessions.
thedotmack/claude-mem
host-observer
Helps your agent respond to Claude-Mem observer tasks. It should only reply with 'skip_summary' or a full XML observation.
thedotmack/claude-mem
Similar skills
dashboard-builder
Helps your agent create useful monitoring dashboards. It turns data into charts that answer important system questions.
affaan-m/ECC
dev-team
Simulates a collaborative development team where different roles respond to a problem together. It's useful for getting multiple perspectives without manually switching agents.
affaan-m/ECC
ecc-council
Has your agent convene a four-voice council for difficult decisions. It's useful when there are multiple good options and debate is needed before choosing.
affaan-m/ECC