Docs: move submission guidance to GitHub templates (#16232)

* Docs: move submission guidance to GitHub templates

* Docs: make PR risk template entries flexible

* Docs: remove PR reviewer checklist section
This commit is contained in:
Tak Hoffman
2026-02-14 08:27:01 -06:00
committed by GitHub
parent 493f6f458b
commit 302dafbe1a
11 changed files with 276 additions and 629 deletions

View File

@@ -1,34 +0,0 @@
---
name: Bug report
about: Report a problem or unexpected behavior in Clawdbot.
title: "[Bug]: "
labels: bug
---
## Summary
What went wrong?
## Steps to reproduce
1.
2.
3.
## Expected behavior
What did you expect to happen?
## Actual behavior
What actually happened?
## Environment
- Clawdbot version:
- OS:
- Install method (pnpm/npx/docker/etc):
## Logs or screenshots
Paste relevant logs or add screenshots (redact secrets).

95
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml vendored Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
name: Bug report
description: Report a defect or unexpected behavior in OpenClaw.
title: "[Bug]: "
labels:
- bug
body:
- type: markdown
attributes:
value: |
Thanks for filing this report. Keep it concise, reproducible, and evidence-based.
- type: textarea
id: summary
attributes:
label: Summary
description: One-sentence statement of what is broken.
placeholder: After upgrading to 2026.2.13, Telegram thread replies fail with "reply target not found".
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: repro
attributes:
label: Steps to reproduce
description: Provide the shortest deterministic repro path.
placeholder: |
1. Configure channel X.
2. Send message Y.
3. Run command Z.
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: expected
attributes:
label: Expected behavior
description: What should happen if the bug does not exist.
placeholder: Agent posts a reply in the same thread.
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: actual
attributes:
label: Actual behavior
description: What happened instead, including user-visible errors.
placeholder: No reply is posted; gateway logs "reply target not found".
validations:
required: true
- type: input
id: version
attributes:
label: OpenClaw version
description: Exact version/build tested.
placeholder: 2026.2.13
validations:
required: true
- type: input
id: os
attributes:
label: Operating system
description: OS and version where this occurs.
placeholder: macOS 15.4 / Ubuntu 24.04 / Windows 11
validations:
required: true
- type: input
id: install_method
attributes:
label: Install method
description: How OpenClaw was installed or launched.
placeholder: npm global / pnpm dev / docker / mac app
- type: textarea
id: logs
attributes:
label: Logs, screenshots, and evidence
description: Include redacted logs/screenshots/recordings that prove the behavior.
render: shell
- type: textarea
id: impact
attributes:
label: Impact and severity
description: |
Explain who is affected, how severe it is, how often it happens, and the practical consequence.
Include:
- Affected users/systems/channels
- Severity (annoying, blocks workflow, data risk, etc.)
- Frequency (always/intermittent/edge case)
- Consequence (missed messages, failed onboarding, extra cost, etc.)
placeholder: |
Affected: Telegram group users on 2026.2.13
Severity: High (blocks replies)
Frequency: 100% repro
Consequence: Agents cannot respond in threads
- type: textarea
id: additional_information
attributes:
label: Additional information
description: Add any context that helps triage but does not fit above.
placeholder: Regression started after upgrade from 2026.2.12; temporary workaround is restarting gateway every 30m.

View File

@@ -1,22 +0,0 @@
---
name: Feature request
about: Suggest an idea or improvement for Clawdbot.
title: "[Feature]: "
labels: enhancement
---
## Summary
Describe the problem you are trying to solve or the opportunity you see.
## Proposed solution
What would you like Clawdbot to do?
## Alternatives considered
Any other approaches you have considered?
## Additional context
Links, screenshots, or related issues.

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
name: Feature request
description: Propose a new capability or product improvement.
title: "[Feature]: "
labels:
- enhancement
body:
- type: markdown
attributes:
value: |
Help us evaluate this request with concrete use cases and tradeoffs.
- type: textarea
id: summary
attributes:
label: Summary
description: One-line statement of the requested capability.
placeholder: Add per-channel default response prefix.
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: problem
attributes:
label: Problem to solve
description: What user pain this solves and why current behavior is insufficient.
placeholder: Teams cannot distinguish agent personas in mixed channels, causing misrouted follow-ups.
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: proposed_solution
attributes:
label: Proposed solution
description: Desired behavior/API/UX with as much specificity as possible.
placeholder: Support channels.<channel>.responsePrefix with default fallback and account-level override.
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: alternatives
attributes:
label: Alternatives considered
description: Other approaches considered and why they are weaker.
placeholder: Manual prefixing in prompts is inconsistent and hard to enforce.
- type: textarea
id: impact
attributes:
label: Impact
description: |
Explain who is affected, severity/urgency, how often this pain occurs, and practical consequences.
Include:
- Affected users/systems/channels
- Severity (annoying, blocks workflow, etc.)
- Frequency (always/intermittent/edge case)
- Consequence (delays, errors, extra manual work, etc.)
placeholder: |
Affected: Multi-team shared channels
Severity: Medium
Frequency: Daily
Consequence: +20 minutes/day/operator and delayed alerts
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: evidence
attributes:
label: Evidence/examples
description: Prior art, links, screenshots, logs, or metrics.
placeholder: Comparable behavior in X, sample config, and screenshot of current limitation.
- type: textarea
id: additional_information
attributes:
label: Additional information
description: Extra context, constraints, or references not covered above.
placeholder: Must remain backward-compatible with existing config keys.

108
.github/pull_request_template.md vendored Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
## Summary
Describe the problem and fix in 25 bullets:
- Problem:
- Why it matters:
- What changed:
- What did NOT change (scope boundary):
## Change Type (select all)
- [ ] Bug fix
- [ ] Feature
- [ ] Refactor
- [ ] Docs
- [ ] Security hardening
- [ ] Chore/infra
## Scope (select all touched areas)
- [ ] Gateway / orchestration
- [ ] Skills / tool execution
- [ ] Auth / tokens
- [ ] Memory / storage
- [ ] Integrations
- [ ] API / contracts
- [ ] UI / DX
- [ ] CI/CD / infra
## Linked Issue/PR
- Closes #
- Related #
## User-visible / Behavior Changes
List user-visible changes (including defaults/config).
If none, write `None`.
## Security Impact (required)
- New permissions/capabilities? (`Yes/No`)
- Secrets/tokens handling changed? (`Yes/No`)
- New/changed network calls? (`Yes/No`)
- Command/tool execution surface changed? (`Yes/No`)
- Data access scope changed? (`Yes/No`)
- If any `Yes`, explain risk + mitigation:
## Repro + Verification
### Environment
- OS:
- Runtime/container:
- Model/provider:
- Integration/channel (if any):
- Relevant config (redacted):
### Steps
1.
2.
3.
### Expected
-
### Actual
-
## Evidence
Attach at least one:
- [ ] Failing test/log before + passing after
- [ ] Trace/log snippets
- [ ] Screenshot/recording
- [ ] Perf numbers (if relevant)
## Human Verification (required)
What you personally verified (not just CI), and how:
- Verified scenarios:
- Edge cases checked:
- What you did **not** verify:
## Compatibility / Migration
- Backward compatible? (`Yes/No`)
- Config/env changes? (`Yes/No`)
- Migration needed? (`Yes/No`)
- If yes, exact upgrade steps:
## Failure Recovery (if this breaks)
- How to disable/revert this change quickly:
- Files/config to restore:
- Known bad symptoms reviewers should watch for:
## Risks and Mitigations
List only real risks for this PR. Add/remove entries as needed. If none, write `None`.
- Risk:
- Mitigation:

View File

@@ -100,8 +100,8 @@
- Create commits with `scripts/committer "<msg>" <file...>`; avoid manual `git add`/`git commit` so staging stays scoped.
- Follow concise, action-oriented commit messages (e.g., `CLI: add verbose flag to send`).
- Group related changes; avoid bundling unrelated refactors.
- Read this when submitting a PR: `docs/help/submitting-a-pr.md` ([Submitting a PR](https://docs.openclaw.ai/help/submitting-a-pr))
- Read this when submitting an issue: `docs/help/submitting-an-issue.md` ([Submitting an Issue](https://docs.openclaw.ai/help/submitting-an-issue))
- PR submission template (canonical): `.github/pull_request_template.md`
- Issue submission templates (canonical): `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/`
## Shorthand Commands

View File

@@ -1290,7 +1290,7 @@
},
{
"group": "Contributing",
"pages": ["help/submitting-a-pr", "help/submitting-an-issue", "ci"]
"pages": ["ci"]
},
{
"group": "Docs meta",
@@ -1817,10 +1817,6 @@
"group": "开发者设置",
"pages": ["zh-CN/start/setup"]
},
{
"group": "贡献",
"pages": ["zh-CN/help/submitting-a-pr", "zh-CN/help/submitting-an-issue"]
},
{
"group": "文档元信息",
"pages": ["zh-CN/start/hubs", "zh-CN/start/docs-directory"]

View File

@@ -1,398 +0,0 @@
---
summary: "How to submit a high signal PR"
title: "Submitting a PR"
---
Good PRs are easy to review: reviewers should quickly know the intent, verify behavior, and land changes safely. This guide covers concise, high-signal submissions for human and LLM review.
## What makes a good PR
- [ ] Explain the problem, why it matters, and the change.
- [ ] Keep changes focused. Avoid broad refactors.
- [ ] Summarize user-visible/config/default changes.
- [ ] List test coverage, skips, and reasons.
- [ ] Add evidence: logs, screenshots, or recordings (UI/UX).
- [ ] Code word: put “lobster-biscuit” in the PR description if you read this guide.
- [ ] Run/fix relevant `pnpm` commands before creating PR.
- [ ] Search codebase and GitHub for related functionality/issues/fixes.
- [ ] Base claims on evidence or observation.
- [ ] Good title: verb + scope + outcome (e.g., `Docs: add PR and issue templates`).
Be concise; concise review > grammar. Omit any non-applicable sections.
### Baseline validation commands (run/fix failures for your change)
- `pnpm lint`
- `pnpm check`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm test`
- Protocol changes: `pnpm protocol:check`
## Progressive disclosure
- Top: summary/intent
- Next: changes/risks
- Next: test/verification
- Last: implementation/evidence
## Common PR types: specifics
- [ ] Fix: Add repro, root cause, verification.
- [ ] Feature: Add use cases, behavior/demos/screenshots (UI).
- [ ] Refactor: State "no behavior change", list what moved/simplified.
- [ ] Chore: State why (e.g., build time, CI, dependencies).
- [ ] Docs: Before/after context, link updated page, run `pnpm format`.
- [ ] Test: What gap is covered; how it prevents regressions.
- [ ] Perf: Add before/after metrics, and how measured.
- [ ] UX/UI: Screenshots/video, note accessibility impact.
- [ ] Infra/Build: Environments/validation.
- [ ] Security: Summarize risk, repro, verification, no sensitive data. Grounded claims only.
## Checklist
- [ ] Clear problem/intent
- [ ] Focused scope
- [ ] List behavior changes
- [ ] List and result of tests
- [ ] Manual test steps (when applicable)
- [ ] No secrets/private data
- [ ] Evidence-based
## General PR Template
```md
#### Summary
#### Behavior Changes
#### Codebase and GitHub Search
#### Tests
#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort (self-reported):
- Agent notes (optional, cite evidence):
```
## PR Type templates (replace with your type)
### Fix
```md
#### Summary
#### Repro Steps
#### Root Cause
#### Behavior Changes
#### Tests
#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```
### Feature
```md
#### Summary
#### Use Cases
#### Behavior Changes
#### Existing Functionality Check
- [ ] I searched the codebase for existing functionality.
Searches performed (1-3 bullets):
-
-
#### Tests
#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```
### Refactor
```md
#### Summary
#### Scope
#### No Behavior Change Statement
#### Tests
#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```
### Chore/Maintenance
```md
#### Summary
#### Why This Matters
#### Tests
#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```
### Docs
```md
#### Summary
#### Pages Updated
#### Before/After
#### Formatting
pnpm format
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```
### Test
```md
#### Summary
#### Gap Covered
#### Tests
#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```
### Perf
```md
#### Summary
#### Baseline
#### After
#### Measurement Method
#### Tests
#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```
### UX/UI
```md
#### Summary
#### Screenshots or Video
#### Accessibility Impact
#### Tests
#### Manual Testing
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2. **Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```
### Infra/Build
```md
#### Summary
#### Environments Affected
#### Validation Steps
#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```
### Security
```md
#### Summary
#### Risk Summary
#### Repro Steps
#### Mitigation or Fix
#### Verification
#### Tests
#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
#### Evidence (omit if N/A)
**Sign-Off**
- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:
```

View File

@@ -1,152 +0,0 @@
---
summary: "Filing high-signal issues and bug reports"
title: "Submitting an Issue"
---
## Submitting an Issue
Clear, concise issues speed up diagnosis and fixes. Include the following for bugs, regressions, or feature gaps:
### What to include
- [ ] Title: area & symptom
- [ ] Minimal repro steps
- [ ] Expected vs actual
- [ ] Impact & severity
- [ ] Environment: OS, runtime, versions, config
- [ ] Evidence: redacted logs, screenshots (non-PII)
- [ ] Scope: new, regression, or longstanding
- [ ] Code word: lobster-biscuit in your issue
- [ ] Searched codebase & GitHub for existing issue
- [ ] Confirmed not recently fixed/addressed (esp. security)
- [ ] Claims backed by evidence or repro
Be brief. Terseness > perfect grammar.
Validation (run/fix before PR):
- `pnpm lint`
- `pnpm check`
- `pnpm build`
- `pnpm test`
- If protocol code: `pnpm protocol:check`
### Templates
#### Bug report
```md
- [ ] Minimal repro
- [ ] Expected vs actual
- [ ] Environment
- [ ] Affected channels, where not seen
- [ ] Logs/screenshots (redacted)
- [ ] Impact/severity
- [ ] Workarounds
### Summary
### Repro Steps
### Expected
### Actual
### Environment
### Logs/Evidence
### Impact
### Workarounds
```
#### Security issue
```md
### Summary
### Impact
### Versions
### Repro Steps (safe to share)
### Mitigation/workaround
### Evidence (redacted)
```
_Avoid secrets/exploit details in public. For sensitive issues, minimize detail and request private disclosure._
#### Regression report
```md
### Summary
### Last Known Good
### First Known Bad
### Repro Steps
### Expected
### Actual
### Environment
### Logs/Evidence
### Impact
```
#### Feature request
```md
### Summary
### Problem
### Proposed Solution
### Alternatives
### Impact
### Evidence/examples
```
#### Enhancement
```md
### Summary
### Current vs Desired Behavior
### Rationale
### Alternatives
### Evidence/examples
```
#### Investigation
```md
### Summary
### Symptoms
### What Was Tried
### Environment
### Logs/Evidence
### Impact
```
### Submitting a fix PR
Issue before PR is optional. Include details in PR if skipping. Keep the PR focused, note issue number, add tests or explain absence, document behavior changes/risks, include redacted logs/screenshots as proof, and run proper validation before submitting.

View File

@@ -1,8 +0,0 @@
---
summary: 如何提交高信号 PR
title: 提交 PR
---
# 提交 PR
该页面是英文文档的中文占位版本,完整内容请先参考英文版:[Submitting a PR](/help/submitting-a-pr)。

View File

@@ -1,8 +0,0 @@
---
summary: 如何提交高信号 Issue
title: 提交 Issue
---
# 提交 Issue
该页面是英文文档的中文占位版本,完整内容请先参考英文版:[Submitting an Issue](/help/submitting-an-issue)。