Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Publish Seed specification as GitHub Issues for team-based project management
.claude/skills/q00-publish/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 4347% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 100% | 0% |
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 121% | 0% |
| case-15 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 79% | 0% |
| case-16 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 94% | 0% |
Convert a Seed specification into structured GitHub Issues for team workflows.
ooo publish [seed_path]
/ouroboros:publish [seed_path]Trigger keywords: "publish to github", "create issues from seed", "seed to issues"
When the user invokes this skill:
1a. Verify gh CLI is installed:
bashcommand -v gh >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo "OK" || echo "MISSING"
If missing, tell the user:
GitHub CLI (gh) is not installed.
Install it: https://cli.github.com/Stop.
1b. Verify gh is authenticated:
bashgh auth status
If not authenticated, tell the user:
GitHub CLI is not authenticated. Run: gh auth loginStop.
Ouroboros stores seeds in ~/.ouroboros/seeds/:
~/.ouroboros/seeds/{seed_id}.yaml (YAML)~/.ouroboros/seeds/pm_seed_{id}.json (JSON)Determine the Seed source in this priority order:
.yaml or .json), read it directlybash ls -t ~/.ouroboros/seeds/*.yaml ~/.ouroboros/seeds/*.json 2>/dev/null | head -5 If multiple seeds exist, present the top candidates via AskUserQuestion and let the user choose.
ooo seed or ooo pm was just run in this conversation and the seed path was reported, use that path.If no seed is found:
No Seed found. Run `ooo seed` or `ooo pm` first to generate a specification.Stop.
Detect the file format by extension and parse accordingly:
For YAML seeds (from ooo interview + ooo seed): Read the YAML file and extract:
goal → Epic title and descriptionconstraints → Listed in Epic bodyacceptance_criteria → Checklist items in Epic + distributed to Task issuesontology_schema → Documentation section in Epicevaluation_principles → Quality criteria referenceexit_conditions → Definition of Donemetadata.ambiguity_score → Confidence indicatormetadata.seed_id → Used for duplicate detectionFor JSON seeds (from ooo pm): Read the JSON file and extract fields using the actual PMSeed schema:
| PMSeed field | Maps to | |-------------|---------| | pm_id | Seed identifier (for duplicate detection) | | product_name | Epic title prefix | | goal | Epic Goal section | | constraints | Epic Constraints section (array of strings) | | success_criteria | Acceptance Criteria checklist (array of strings) | | user_stories | User Stories section (array of {persona, action, benefit}) | | deferred_items | Deferred Items section (array of strings) | | decide_later_items | Open Questions section (array of strings) | | assumptions | Assumptions section (array of strings) |
Format user stories as: "As a {persona}, I want to {action}, so that {benefit}."
If any field is missing or empty, omit that section from the Epic body rather than failing.
4a. Attempt auto-detection from current directory:
bashgh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q '.nameWithOwner' 2>/dev/null
4b. Present the target repo choice via AskUserQuestion:
If auto-detection succeeded:
json{ "questions": [{ "question": "Publish Seed as GitHub Issues to this repository?", "header": "Target Repository", "options": [ {"label": "<detected_repo>", "description": "Use current repository"}, {"label": "Other", "description": "I'll specify a different owner/repo"} ], "multiSelect": false }] }
If auto-detection failed (not in a git repo):
json{ "questions": [{ "question": "Which GitHub repository should the issues be created in? (format: owner/repo)", "header": "Target Repository" }] }
If the user chose "Other", ask:
json{ "questions": [{ "question": "Enter the target repository (format: owner/repo):", "header": "Target Repository" }] }
Store the resolved repository as TARGET_REPO. All subsequent gh commands MUST include -R <TARGET_REPO> to ensure they target the correct repository.
Before creating issues, check if this seed was already published:
bashgh issue list -R <TARGET_REPO> --label "ouroboros" --state all --search "<seed_id or pm_id>" --limit 5 --json number,title,state
The search uses the seed's unique identifier (metadata.seed_id for YAML seeds, pm_id for JSON seeds). This works because Step 7 persists the identifier in the Epic body (see the Seed ID field in the Epic template).
If matching issues are found, warn the user via AskUserQuestion:
json{ "questions": [{ "question": "Found existing Ouroboros issues that may be from the same seed:\n\n<list of matching issues>\n\nCreate new issues anyway?", "header": "Duplicate Warning", "options": [ {"label": "Create anyway", "description": "Proceed with new issues"}, {"label": "Cancel", "description": "Do not create duplicate issues"} ], "multiSelect": false }] }
If "Cancel": Stop.
Before creating issues, present the planned structure to the user for review.
6a. Break down acceptance criteria into Task groups:
Analyze the acceptance criteria and group them into logical implementation units. Each unit becomes a Task issue. Use your understanding of the domain to create meaningful groupings (e.g., group by feature area, layer, or dependency order).
6b. Present the plan via AskUserQuestion:
json{ "questions": [{ "question": "Here's the planned issue structure:\n\n**Epic**: <goal summary>\n\n**Tasks**:\n1. <task_1_title> — <brief scope>\n2. <task_2_title> — <brief scope>\n3. <task_3_title> — <brief scope>\n\nProceed with creating these issues?", "header": "Issue Plan", "options": [ {"label": "Create issues", "description": "Publish to GitHub now"}, {"label": "Modify plan", "description": "I want to adjust the structure first"} ], "multiSelect": false }] }
If "Modify plan": Ask what to change, adjust, and re-present.
IMPORTANT: Every gh command in this step MUST include -R <TARGET_REPO>.
Issue number extraction: gh issue create outputs a URL like https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/42. Extract the issue number by parsing the trailing digits:
bashEPIC_URL=$(gh issue create -R <TARGET_REPO> --title "..." --label "..." --body "...") EPIC_NUM=$(echo "$EPIC_URL" | grep -o '[0-9]*$')
Apply the same extraction pattern for every Task issue created.
7a. Create labels (if they don't exist):
bashgh label create "ouroboros" -R <TARGET_REPO> --description "Created by Ouroboros publish" --color "6f42c1" 2>/dev/null || true gh label create "epic" -R <TARGET_REPO> --description "Epic / parent issue" --color "0075ca" 2>/dev/null || true gh label create "task" -R <TARGET_REPO> --description "Implementation task" --color "008672" 2>/dev/null || true
7b. Create the Epic issue:
bashgh issue create -R <TARGET_REPO> \ --title "[Epic] <goal_summary>" \ --label "ouroboros,epic" \ --body "$(cat <<'BODY' ## Goal <goal from seed> ## Constraints <constraints as bullet list> ## Acceptance Criteria - [ ] <criterion_1> - [ ] <criterion_2> - ... ## Ontology | Field | Type | Description | |-------|------|-------------| | <field_name> | <type> | <description> | ## Evaluation Principles | Principle | Weight | Description | |-----------|--------|-------------| | <name> | <weight> | <description> | ## Exit Conditions <exit conditions as bullet list> --- **Seed ID**: `<seed_id or pm_id>` | **Ambiguity Score**: <score> | **Seed**: `<seed_file_path>` *Generated by [Ouroboros](https://github.com/Q00/ouroboros) via `ooo publish`* BODY )"
Capture the Epic issue number from the output.
7c. Create Task issues (one per implementation unit):
For each task:
bashgh issue create -R <TARGET_REPO> \ --title "[Task] <task_title>" \ --label "ouroboros,task" \ --body "$(cat <<'BODY' Parent: #<epic_number> ## Scope <what this task covers> ## Acceptance Criteria - [ ] <specific_criterion_1> - [ ] <specific_criterion_2> ## Test Checklist - [ ] <test_1> - [ ] <test_2> - [ ] <test_3> ## Pass Criteria <measurable conditions for this task to be considered done> --- *Part of [Epic] #<epic_number> | Generated by [Ouroboros](https://github.com/Q00/ouroboros) via `ooo publish`* BODY )"
7d. Update Epic with task links:
After all tasks are created, add a comment to the Epic:
bashgh issue comment <epic_number> -R <TARGET_REPO> --body "$(cat <<'BODY' ## Implementation Tasks - [ ] #<task_1_number> — <task_1_title> - [ ] #<task_2_number> — <task_2_title> - [ ] #<task_3_number> — <task_3_title> Track overall progress by checking off tasks as their issues are closed. BODY )"
Present the results:
Published to <TARGET_REPO>:
#<epic> [Epic] <goal_summary>
├── #<task_1> [Task] <task_1_title>
├── #<task_2> [Task] <task_2_title>
└── #<task_3> [Task] <task_3_title>
View: https://github.com/<TARGET_REPO>/issues/<epic>Then suggest next steps:
Next steps:
- Assign tasks to team members on GitHub
- Use GitHub Projects board for tracking
- Run `ooo run` for AI-assisted implementation of individual tasksgh CLIgh commands use -R <TARGET_REPO>, so seeds can be published to any repository the user has write access toooo seed and JSON seeds from ooo pm are both supported — the parser auto-detects format by file extension| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→fail | 6,130 | 5,725 | -7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 430 | 3,089 | +618% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 6,208 | 4,666 | -25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 319 | 3,148 | +887% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 4,330 | 6,250 | +44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 708 | 3,237 | +357% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | 10,217 | 9,276 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,438 | 4,493 | +212% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 5,891 | 31,537 | +435% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 225 | 10,005 | +4347% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | 13,662 | 6,631 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,068 | 3,321 | +61% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 3,757 | 2,784 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 561 | 3,491 | +522% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→fail | 7,591 | 7,271 | -4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,164 | 3,279 | +182% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 11,779 | 4,141 | -65% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,740 | 3,485 | +100% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 7,326 | 1,978 | -73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,219 | 3,262 | +168% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 10,199 | 3,197 | -69% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,769 | 3,320 | +88% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 10,546 | 3,842 | -64% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,435 | 3,380 | +136% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 8,790 | 3,498 | -60% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,619 | 3,583 | +121% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→fail | 8,196 | 3,702 | -55% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,318 | 3,559 | +170% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | 11,535 | 4,380 | -62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,092 | 3,755 | +79% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 13,797 | 3,987 | -71% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,913 | 3,719 | +94% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 9,559 | 2,673 | -72% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,502 | 3,170 | +111% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 10,564 | 2,956 | -72% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,441 | 3,300 | +129% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 12,036 | 5,852 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,865 | 3,709 | +99% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 6,477 | 1,997 | -69% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,039 | 3,274 | +215% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 12,918 | 3,485 | -73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,054 | 3,463 | +69% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→pass | 11,286 | 6,943 | -38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,935 | 3,902 | +102% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted, and 17 counted toward the lift figure. The other 5 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +32 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 17 comparable cases. 3 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.