implementation: let implement-dispatch run a spec'd item list without a PLAN.md
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
まだ誰も着手していません。
評価
- 難易度
- 4/5
- 見積もり時間
- 3〜5日
- 初心者へのやさしさ
- 32/100
- issue の種類
- 機能追加
- 明瞭さ
- おおむね明確
- 活発さ
- 活発
- 技術スタック
- markdown, shell
調査の方向性
Start from the existing /implementation:implement-dispatch skill and SKILL.md (item 11 on quoting PLAN.md ## Design, phases, and implementation:phase-verifier). Trace how briefs, phases, and verifiers currently require an approved PLAN.md. Design an item-list mode (e.g. --items <report path>) that groups file:line items into disjoint workers, injects a shared PR-lifecycle block, uses per-item acceptance checks instead of phase-verifier, and defines a denied-edit return shape. Related: #5764. Done when dispatch can run from a scoped audit/report without writing PLAN.md.
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
説明
Problem
/implementation:implement-dispatch assumes an approved PLAN.md: briefs quote its ## Design section (SKILL.md item 11), phases come from it, and each phase boundary runs implementation:phase-verifier. In the 2026-10-04 CI-performance session the work arrived instead as audit or report output that was already scoped to file:line with acceptance evidence:
- a version-consumer audit listing 10 required changes with file:line targets;
- a selection-gap plan (F1-F9) with file:line targets and expected gap counts;
- verifier findings to fold back into open PRs.
Writing a PLAN.md for that would only restate the report. So the session bypassed the skill and hand-dispatched general agents, each told to spawn its own fresh-context verifier and carry its own PR through ready → CI → review threads → merge. That worked, but every brief re-typed the same lifecycle rules, and three recurring gaps had no skill support:
- File-ownership fencing across parallel workers. Two workers started in overlapping areas. The coordinator had to reassign ownership by hand mid-flight and relay one worker's half-built script to another.
- PR lifecycle per worker. Each worker needed: draft, verifier, ready, an empty commit when a draft-era ci-status failure lingers, review threads resolved with resolveReviewThread as a separate call, merge-queue
--match-head-commit, version-conflict resolver, re-queue once on a known flake. All of it was re-specified in every brief. - Classifier denials in a worker. A worker cannot see the owner's in-session approval, so an approved edit was denied in the worker and had to be escalated and applied in the main session. The skill has no "escalate the exact edit to the coordinator" return shape.
Ask
Add a context-specific entry point that keeps the dispatch discipline but drops the plan-document requirement when the input is already scoped. For example implement-dispatch --items <report path> or an "item-list mode":
- Input: a list of items, each with file:line targets and an acceptance check, from an audit, review or report file.
- Group items into workers by disjoint file sets, and record ownership so a second worker is refused an owned path.
- One fresh-context verifier per resulting PR, with criteria taken from each item's acceptance check. This replaces phase-verifier, which needs a plan.
- A shared PR-lifecycle block (the steps in 2) injected into every brief, instead of hand-copied.
- A standard return shape for "denied edit, here is the exact diff" so the coordinator can apply it where the approval is visible.
Related: #5764 (dispatch independent plan phases in parallel by default).
Evidence
Session dba79e68-af19-4ecc-a0ce-69d8b1dbefbb (transcript under ~/.claude/projects/C--Users-KyleSexton/). Resulting PRs include #6343-#6346, #6359, #6369, #6370 and the phase-3 PRs for #6006.
- 主要言語
- Shell
- スター
- 22
- フォーク
- 2
- 平均マージ
- 5時間 11分
- マージ済み PR（30日）
- 838
環境構築
- Dockerfile・Docker Compose ファイルなし
- プルリクエストのテンプレートなし
- コントリビューションガイドを読む
はじめの一歩
- issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
- 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
- リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
- issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。
melodic-software/claude-code-plugins のほかの issue
-
good first issue needs-triage priority: medium
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 72/100
melodic-software/claude-code-plugins#6631 · コメント 1 件 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
needs-triage
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 78/100
melodic-software/claude-code-plugins#6547 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
needs-triage
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 76/100
melodic-software/claude-code-plugins#6535 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
test_comment_census.py: SccArgv flag-shaped-filename test errors on Windows (#!/bin/sh scc shim)オープンgood first issue needs-triage priority: low
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 72/100
melodic-software/claude-code-plugins#6532 · コメント 1 件 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
good first issue needs-triage priority: low
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 72/100
melodic-software/claude-code-plugins#6390 · コメント 1 件 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
melodic-software/claude-code-plugins の issue をすべて見る
似ている issue
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 78/100
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 72/100
gnosis/gnosis_vpn#540 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
Lid close does not lock the session on Apple Silicon (lid-close bind skips omarchy-system-lid-close)オープン
難易度 1/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 90/100
omacom/omarchy-mac#701 · コメント 1 件 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
A 20.x release after 21.0.0 would move `latest` back to 20.x, and `next` stays on the release candidate対応中かも @armando-navarro が今日担当しました。 オープンcomp: build/pipeline type: bug version: current (v17+)
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 85/100
angular/angularfire#3790 ·
メンテナーはふだん 3 日以内に返信
-
難易度 1/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 86/100
omacom/omarchy#14490 · コメント 1 件 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信