linear-type-labeler

por sentry

Clasifica los issues de Linear y aplica una etiqueta de Tipo de la taxonomía de etiquetas del espacio de trabajo de Sentry basándose en el contenido del título y la descripción de cada issue.

npx skills add https://github.com/getsentry/sdk-skills --skill linear-type-labeler

Linear Type Labeler

Classifies Linear issues and applies a Type label from the Sentry workspace's label taxonomy based on the content of each issue's title and description.

Requirements

This skill requires the Linear MCP server to be configured.

Type Label Reference

Type labels in the Sentry workspace (workspace-level, not per-team):

LabelWhen to use
BugSomething is broken, regression, error, crash, incorrect behavior
FeatureNew capability, integration, API, SDK support — something that doesn't exist yet
ImprovementMaking existing functionality better — performance, DX, UX, reliability
TaskChore, investigation, spike, migration, cleanup, operational work
Tracking IssueParent/umbrella tracking a larger body of work; has sub-issues or a checklist
DocsDocumentation, RFC, write-up, changelog, guide
TestsWriting or fixing tests, coverage, test infrastructure

Workflow

Step 1 — Identify issues to process

Two modes:

A — List of Linear IDs provided (e.g. SDK-123, SDK-456):

  • Fetch each issue by ID using get_issue. Skip the team-fetch step entirely.

B — No IDs provided:

  • Infer the team: (1) current GitHub repository name — for the getsentry org, the repo name matches the Linear team name, (2) explicitly stated by the user, (3) if still ambiguous, ask.

Step 2 — Fetch label IDs

Use query_data to fetch workspace-level labels and build a UUID map:

query_data: fetch all labels for the workspace (not the team)
→ filter to those whose parent label name is "Type"
→ build a map: { "Bug": "<uuid>", "Feature": "<uuid>", ... }

If the workspace has no "Type" label group, surface that to the user before proceeding.

Step 3 — Fetch and filter issues

If in mode A (list of IDs): use the already-fetched issues from Step 1. Filter client-side: keep only those where none of the issue's label IDs appear in the Step 2 UUID map values.

If in mode B (team): use query_data to list issues for the team, including each issue's label IDs. Paginate (limit 50, use cursor) until done. Filter client-side: keep only issues where none of the issue's label IDs appear in the Step 2 UUID map values (i.e., no Type label assigned yet).

Announce the total candidate count before continuing. If there are more than 25 candidates, process in chunks of 25, confirming each chunk before the next.

Step 4 — Classify each issue

For each candidate issue, read its title and description. Apply heuristics in priority order — stop at the first match:

  1. Title or description is clearly about testing work: mentions "test", "tests", "coverage", "test infra", "test suite", "unit test", "integration test" → Tests
  2. Title or description is clearly about documentation: mentions "docs", "README", "changelog", "RFC", "spec", "guide", "write-up", "develop.sentry.dev" → Docs
  3. Title contains [META], [EPIC], "Track", "Tracking"; or description has a checklist of Linear/GitHub issue links → Tracking Issue
  4. Title starts with "Fix", "Fixes", "Broken", "Error", "Crash", "Regression" → Bug
  5. Title starts with "Improve", "Optimize", "Enhance"; or is a refactor with user-visible impact (changes behavior, performance, or API ergonomics) → Improvement
  6. Title starts with "Investigate", "Spike", "Migrate", "Update", "Clean up", "Chore"; or is a refactor with no user-visible change → Task
  7. Title starts with "Add", "Support", "Implement", "New", "Introduce"; or adds something that doesn't exist yet → Feature

When ambiguous between Feature and Improvement: does it add something that doesn't exist at all, or make something existing better? Former → Feature, latter → Improvement.

When ambiguous between Task and Improvement: is there a user-visible benefit (better performance, reliability, DX, API ergonomics)? If yes → Improvement. If it's purely internal with no user-visible impact → Task.

Assign exactly one Type label. Mark confidence:

  • High — clear signal in title or description
  • Low — genuinely ambiguous; flag for human review, don't guess

Step 5 — Present the plan

Show a summary table before writing anything:

| Issue   | Title                  | Proposed Type | Confidence          |
|---------|------------------------|---------------|---------------------|
| SDK-123 | Fix crash on startup   | Bug           | High                |
| SDK-456 | Add OAuth support      | Feature       | High                |
| SDK-789 | Some vague title       | Task          | Low — please review |

Ask: "Should I apply these labels? Reply with any corrections (e.g. 'SDK-789 → Bug') and I'll update the plan before applying."

If the user provides corrections, update the table and show the revised plan before proceeding.

Step 6 — Apply labels

For each approved classification:

  1. Call get_issue to fetch the issue's current label IDs immediately before writing
  2. Append the Type label UUID from the Step 2 map
  3. Call save_issue with the full combined label set

Always re-fetch and always pass the full combined set. Linear replaces labels on update — labels added between Step 3 and now would be silently stripped if you use the cached label list.

Report as you go: "SDK-123 → Bug", "SDK-456 → Feature".

Edge Cases

  • Issue already has a Type label: Skip it; don't overwrite human classifications.
  • Very short title, no description: Flag as low-confidence; surface for human review.
  • Issue belongs to multiple types: Pick the primary type (bug fix with a docs update → Bug).

Más skills de sentry

sentry-snapshots-cocoa
sentry
Configuración completa de Sentry Snapshots para proyectos Apple/Cocoa. Úsalo cuando se te pida "configurar SnapshotPreviews", "configurar pruebas de snapshot en Apple", "subir snapshots de Apple a…
architecture-review
sentry
Revisión de salud del código a nivel de equipo. Encuentra módulos monolíticos, fallos silenciosos, brechas de seguridad de tipos, vacíos en la cobertura de pruebas y problemas de compatibilidad con LLM.
vercel-react-best-practices
sentry
Directrices de optimización de rendimiento para React y Next.js de Vercel Engineering. Esta habilidad debe usarse al escribir, revisar o refactorizar React/Next.js…
bump-size-limit
sentry
Aumenta los límites de tamaño en .size-limit.js cuando la verificación de CI de size-limit falla. Úsalo cuando el usuario mencione fallos en los límites de tamaño, comprobaciones de tamaño de paquete fallidas, tamaño de CI…
commit
sentry
Usa SIEMPRE esta habilidad al hacer commit de cambios de código — nunca hagas commit directamente sin ella. Crea commits siguiendo las convenciones de Sentry con el formato convencional adecuado…
vendor-otel
sentry
Provee un paquete de instrumentación de OpenTelemetry al SDK de JavaScript de Sentry. Úsalo al proveer, incorporar o copiar un @opentelemetry/instrumentation-*…
react-component-documentation
sentry
Crear o actualizar documentación de componentes en el formato de historias MDX de Sentry. Usar cuando se pida "documentar un componente", "agregar historias", "escribir documentación de componentes",…
agents-md
sentry
Esta habilidad debe usarse cuando el usuario pida "crear AGENTS.md", "actualizar AGENTS.md", "mantener documentación de agentes", "configurar CLAUDE.md", o necesite mantener la documentación de agentes…