Skip to content

Update triage agent to separate label and type instructions#66852

Merged
Youssef1313 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
dev/ygerges/issue-triage-agent
May 26, 2026
Merged

Update triage agent to separate label and type instructions#66852
Youssef1313 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
dev/ygerges/issue-triage-agent

Conversation

@Youssef1313

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Follow-up to #66722.

The agent sometimes fails to add the "Feature" type. Likely because "feature-request" label is mentioned in the instructions.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the area-infrastructure Includes: MSBuild projects/targets, build scripts, CI, Installers and shared framework label May 26, 2026
@Youssef1313
Youssef1313 marked this pull request as ready for review May 26, 2026 14:25
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings May 26, 2026 14:25
@Youssef1313
Youssef1313 requested review from a team and wtgodbe as code owners May 26, 2026 14:25
@Youssef1313
Youssef1313 requested a review from DeagleGross May 26, 2026 14:26
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hey @dotnet/aspnet-build, looks like this PR is something you want to take a look at.

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Updates the issue triage agent instructions to better distinguish GitHub issue types from labels, aiming to reduce misclassification (notably missing the Feature type) when the prompt mentions label-like terms.

Changes:

  • Adjusts “Type Classification” guidance to use issue type names (Bug, Feature) and introduces a separate “Additional Labels” step.
  • Renumbers subsequent steps to account for the new section.
  • Regenerates the compiled workflow lock file.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

File Description
.github/workflows/issue-triage-agent.md Refactors the prompt instructions to separate issue type classification from optional labels.
.github/workflows/issue-triage-agent.lock.yml Recompiled workflow lock output corresponding to the agent prompt.
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

.github/workflows/issue-triage-agent.md:312

  • The new “Step 3: Additional Labels” section looks like it’s intended to be a 2-column markdown table, but it no longer has a header row + separator row. As written, GitHub won’t render this as a table (it will just show pipe-delimited text). Add a proper table header (e.g., “Label / When to use”) and the |---|---| separator before the label rows (or convert this section to a bullet list).
## Step 3: Additional Labels

Classify the issue using one of these labels, if applicable:

| `by-design` | The report describes a behavior that doesn't match the reporter's expectations, but the behavior is actually the intended design. |

.github/workflows/issue-triage-agent.md:327

  • This section still refers to the type as bug (lowercase) even though the workflow’s allowed issue types are capitalized (e.g., Bug, Feature). To avoid the agent emitting label-like values (and to align with set-issue-type), update references here (and in the example triage comment) to use the actual issue type names (Bug/Feature) instead of bug/feature-request.
## Step 4: Regression Detection

If the issue is classified as a `bug`, check whether it describes a **regression** —
a behavior that previously worked in an older version but is now broken in a newer one.

Comment on lines 301 to +305
Classify the issue into one of these types:

| Type label | When to use |
| Type | When to use |
|-----------|-------------|
| `bug` | The report clearly identifies a behavior as a bug and it can be reproduced. Something is broken or behaving unexpectedly compared to its intended design. |
| `feature-request` | The report asks for a behavior that is not currently implemented. This may be a brand-new feature or an addition/enhancement to an existing feature. |
| `Bug` | The report clearly identifies a behavior as a bug and it can be reproduced. Something is broken or behaving unexpectedly compared to its intended design. |
Comment thread .github/workflows/issue-triage-agent.lock.yml Outdated
@Youssef1313
Youssef1313 force-pushed the dev/ygerges/issue-triage-agent branch from 8b63e67 to 76d5674 Compare May 26, 2026 14:58
@Youssef1313
Youssef1313 merged commit c3a3603 into main May 26, 2026
10 checks passed
@Youssef1313
Youssef1313 deleted the dev/ygerges/issue-triage-agent branch May 26, 2026 16:31
DeagleGross added a commit to DeagleGross/aspnetcore that referenced this pull request May 27, 2026
…ate)

Merges upstream commits:

* d17cc21 — Add HttpSys wrapper for HttpQueryRequestProperty (dotnet#66700)
* 0fcd398 — Recompile workflows with gh aw v0.76.1 (dotnet#66864)
* e4591cc — dotnet/optimization dependency update
* c3a3603 — Update issue-triage-agent.md (dotnet#66852) (already merged previously)

Conflict resolution:

* All 5 .lock.yml files conflicted because both branches recompiled
  them. Took upstream's lock files (their v0.76.1 recompile is the
  canonical baseline), then re-ran `gh aw compile` on our two source
  files (issue-triage-agent.md and triage-comment-reviewer.md) so our
  .md changes (orchestrator/worker split, reviewer policy, OpenAPI
  disambiguation tip, etc.) are re-layered on top of v0.76.1.

* .github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md was auto-updated by
  `gh aw compile` to point at v0.76.1 documentation URLs and to pick
  up the new dispatcher routing entries (asciicharts, cli-commands,
  token-optimization, patterns) that gh-aw upstream added between
  v0.71.1 and v0.76.1. Upstream hadn't bumped this file yet in their
  recompile commit, so the diff is legitimate and forward-looking.

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
@dotnet-milestone-bot dotnet-milestone-bot Bot added this to the 11.0-preview6 milestone May 27, 2026
javiercn pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 28, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area-infrastructure Includes: MSBuild projects/targets, build scripts, CI, Installers and shared framework

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants