Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to apokamo/kaji. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/apokamo/kaji/main/.claude/skills/issue-fix-ready/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/apokamo/kajiWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/apokamo/kaji/issue-fix-ready)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/apokamo/kaji/issue-fix-ready"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/apokamo/kaji/issue-fix-ready/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/apokamo/kaji/issue-fix-ready"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/apokamo/kaji/issue-fix-ready.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00024 | $0.01519 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00759 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00304 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00152 |
Grade A, and why
issue-fix-ready scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 159 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Issue Fix Ready
issue-review-ready が RETRY を返した指摘事項に基づき、Issue 本文を修正する。
指摘を盲目的に受け入れるのではなく、妥当性を検討し、修正と反論を使い分ける。
いつ使うか
| タイミング | このスキルを使用 |
|---|---|
/issue-review-ready で RETRY 後 |
✅ 必須 |
| PASS 済みの Issue | ❌ 不要 |
ワークフロー内の位置: create → review-ready → (fix-ready → review-ready) → start → ...
worktree 不要(メインリポジトリから実行可能)。
引数
$ARGUMENTS = <issue_id>
解決ルール
コンテキスト変数 issue_id が存在すればそちらを使用。
なければ $ARGUMENTS の第1引数を issue_id として使用。
issue_ref はハーネス経由ではプロンプトに自動注入される(prompt.py 側で provider 別に整形)。手動実行時は issue_id から導出する: GitHub 数値 ID なら #<issue_id>、local-* 形式なら bare ID(# を付けない)。
共通ルール
- _shared/report-unrelated-issues.md — 作業中に発見した無関係な問題の報告ルール
実行手順
Step 1: コンテキスト取得
-
Issue 本文の取得:
kaji issue view [issue_id] --json title,body,labels --jq '{title: .title, body: .body, labels: [.labels[].name]}' -
レビュー指摘の取得:
kaji issue view [issue_id] --comments最新の「レディネスレビュー」コメントから RETRY の指摘事項を抽出する。
Step 2: 対応方針の検討
各指摘事項について 1つずつ 検討する。
-
A: 修正する (Agree)
- 指摘が正しく、Issue 本文の改善につながる場合
- 不足している 1 次情報を補う: 対象ファイルパス、
docs/パス、関連 Issue/PR 番号、CLI 出力、ログ等 - 主観的表現を客観的・検証可能な記述に置き換える
-
B: 反論する (Disagree)
- 指摘が誤解に基づいている場合
- 現状の記述で review-ready の観点を実質的に満たしている場合
- 必須: 反論する場合は明確な論理的根拠を用意する
Step 3: Issue 本文の修正
kaji issue edit で Issue 本文を更新する。
kaji issue edit [issue_id] --commit --body "[updated-body]"
注意事項:
- 既存の本文構造(概要・目的・完了条件)を維持する
- 指摘に対応する箇所のみ修正する。無関係なセクションは変更しない
- 1 次情報の追加では、推測で埋めず事実確認してから記載する
workflow 内判定可能性(観点 14)の修正
通常完了条件に workflow 外の確認が混在しているという指摘は、次の手順で修正する。
docs/dev/workflow_completion_criteria.md§ workflow 内完了条件と事後確認の分離を読む- 各項目について、workflow を RETRY して環境非依存で同じ結果を得られるか判定する
- No の項目だけを
## 完了条件の末尾サブセクション### ワークフロー完了後の確認項目へ移す - Yes の項目が事後確認欄に誤って置かれていれば通常完了条件へ戻す
- 事後確認がなければサブセクションを削除するか、チェックボックスではない
- なしにする
項目の文言とチェック状態は移動時に維持する。通常完了条件と事後確認の両方へ複製しない。
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 9d ago First seen · 159 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 3c03594a8ea3
issue-fix-ready is a skill published in the GitHub repository apokamo/kaji (12 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 1,519 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
software-design-lifecycle-delivery
Use when an architect must decide which architecture lifecycle stage to enter next, route to the correct stage methodology skill, and apply the merged lifecycle backbone as one coherent delivery chain rather than as separate old and new skill systems.
gh-file-issue
Use when filing a new Codewhale GitHub issue: turn a bug or idea into a well-formed, actionable issue with repro, acceptance criteria, labels, and milestone.
gh-treasure-hunt
Hunt the issue/PR queue for highest value-over-risk wins: clean focused community PRs, already-implemented issues to close, safe quick-fixes.
gh-assign-issues
Use to assign GitHub issues to a milestone and/or owners in bulk, verifying each.
pm
Generate a PM through guided PM-focused interview with automatic question classification. Use when the user says 'ooo pm', 'prd', 'product requirements', or wants to create a PRD/PM document.
publish
Publish Seed specification as GitHub Issues for team-based project management.