Miyabi MCP Bundle

# Issue Analysis Skill - Test Cases ## Test Case 1: Security Vulnerability (Critical) **Issue Title**: "Fix SQL injection vulnerability in user authentication" **Issue Description**: ``` The user authentication endpoint is vulnerable to SQL injection attacks. An attacker can bypass authentication by injecting SQL code in the username field. This is a critical security issue affecting all users in production. Steps to reproduce: 1. Go to /api/auth/login 2. Enter username: admin' OR '1'='1 3. Authentication succeeds without password Expected behavior: SQL queries should use parameterized statements Actual behavior: Direct string concatenation allows SQL injection Impact: All users' accounts can be compromised ``` **Expected Labels**: - TYPE: `🐛 type:bug` - PRIORITY: `🔥 priority:P0-Critical` - SEVERITY: `🚨 severity:Sev.1-Critical` - SPECIAL: `🔐 security` - AGENT: `🤖 agent:codegen` - STATE: `📥 state:pending` --- ## Test Case 2: New Feature Request (Medium Priority) **Issue Title**: "Add dark mode support to UI" **Issue Description**: ``` Users have requested a dark mode option for the application UI. This would improve usability during nighttime usage and reduce eye strain. Requirements: - Toggle switch in settings - Persist user preference - Apply theme across all pages - Use CSS variables for theming Nice-to-have: - Auto-detect system preference - Smooth theme transition animation Target: Next minor release (v1.2.0) ``` **Expected Labels**: - TYPE: `✨ type:feature` - PRIORITY: `📊 priority:P2-Medium` - PHASE: `🎯 phase:planning` - AGENT: `🤖 agent:codegen` - COMMUNITY: `👋 good-first-issue` - STATE: `📥 state:pending` --- ## Test Case 3: Documentation Update (Low Priority) **Issue Title**: "Update README with installation instructions" **Issue Description**: ``` The README file is missing clear installation instructions for new users. Tasks: - Add prerequisites section (Rust, Node.js versions) - Document cargo install command - Add troubleshooting section for common issues - Include examples of basic usage This is a simple documentation update that would help new contributors. ``` **Expected Labels**: - TYPE: `📚 type:docs` - PRIORITY: `📝 priority:P3-Low` - AGENT: None (manual) - COMMUNITY: `👋 good-first-issue` - STATE: `📥 state:pending` --- ## Test Case 4: Performance Issue (High Priority) **Issue Title**: "Slow response time on /api/users endpoint" **Issue Description**: ``` The /api/users endpoint is taking 5-10 seconds to respond with 1000+ users. This is affecting the admin dashboard user experience. Current performance: - 100 users: 200ms - 500 users: 1s - 1000 users: 5s - 5000 users: timeout (30s) Expected performance: <500ms for 5000 users Root cause analysis needed: - Missing database indexes? - N+1 query problem? - Inefficient serialization? Impact: Admin users experiencing delays ``` **Expected Labels**: - TYPE: `🐛 type:bug` - PRIORITY: `⚠️ priority:P1-High` - SEVERITY: `⚠️ severity:Sev.2-High` - SPECIAL: `📊 performance` - AGENT: `🤖 agent:codegen` - PHASE: `🔧 phase:development` - STATE: `📥 state:pending` --- ## Test Case 5: Architecture Migration (High Priority) **Issue Title**: "Migrate from monolith to microservices architecture" **Issue Description**: ``` We need to break down the monolithic application into microservices to improve scalability and independent deployment. Proposed architecture: 1. User Service (authentication, profiles) 2. API Gateway (routing, rate limiting) 3. Data Service (database access) 4. Notification Service (emails, push notifications) Migration plan: - Phase 1: Extract User Service (2 weeks) - Phase 2: Set up API Gateway (1 week) - Phase 3: Extract Data Service (3 weeks) - Phase 4: Extract Notification Service (2 weeks) Risks: - Service communication complexity - Data consistency across services - Deployment coordination - Monitoring and debugging Dependencies: Docker, Kubernetes, Service mesh Budget: $50k (infrastructure costs estimated) ``` **Expected Labels**: - TYPE: `🏗️ type:architecture` - PRIORITY: `⚠️ priority:P1-High` - PHASE: `🎯 phase:planning` - SPECIAL: `💰 cost-watch` - AGENT: `🤖 agent:coordinator` - HIERARCHY: `🌳 hierarchy:root` - STATE: `📥 state:pending` --- ## Test Case 6: Deployment Automation (Medium Priority) **Issue Title**: "Automate staging environment deployment" **Issue Description**: ``` Currently, deploying to staging requires manual steps. We should automate this process using GitHub Actions. Requirements: - Trigger on merge to develop branch - Run tests before deployment - Build Docker image - Deploy to staging server - Run smoke tests - Send Slack notification CI/CD tools: GitHub Actions, Docker, Firebase ``` **Expected Labels**: - TYPE: `🚀 type:deployment` - PRIORITY: `📊 priority:P2-Medium` - PHASE: `🚀 phase:deployment` - AGENT: `🤖 agent:deployment` - TRIGGER: `🤖 trigger:deploy-staging` - STATE: `📥 state:pending` --- ## Test Case 7: Refactoring Task (Medium Priority) **Issue Title**: "Refactor error handling to use Result<T, E>" **Issue Description**: ``` The codebase currently uses panic! for error handling in many places. We should refactor to use proper Result<T, E> pattern. Files to update: - src/parser.rs - src/validator.rs - src/converter.rs Benefits: - Better error propagation - More testable code - Clearer error messages - No unexpected crashes This is a code quality improvement with no new features. ``` **Expected Labels**: - TYPE: `🔧 type:refactor` - PRIORITY: `📊 priority:P2-Medium` - AGENT: `🤖 agent:codegen` - QUALITY: `🟡 quality:fair` - STATE: `📥 state:pending` --- ## Test Case 8: Test Coverage Improvement (Low Priority) **Issue Title**: "Increase test coverage to 80%" **Issue Description**: ``` Current test coverage is 65%. We should aim for 80% minimum. Areas needing tests: - Authentication module (40% coverage) - Data validation (50% coverage) - API endpoints (70% coverage) Test types needed: - Unit tests for business logic - Integration tests for API - E2E tests for critical flows Good first issue for new contributors familiar with testing. ``` **Expected Labels**: - TYPE: `🧪 type:test` - PRIORITY: `📝 priority:P3-Low` - AGENT: `🤖 agent:codegen` - COMMUNITY: `👋 good-first-issue`, `🙏 help-wanted` - STATE: `📥 state:pending` --- ## Expected Output Format For each test case, the Skill should output: ```markdown ## Issue Analysis Results **Issue**: [Title] ### Inferred Labels #### Required Labels - **TYPE**: [label] - [reasoning] - **PRIORITY**: [label] - [reasoning] - **STATE**: [label] - [reasoning] #### Optional Labels - **SEVERITY**: [label] - [reasoning] (if applicable) - **AGENT**: [label] - [reasoning] (if agent assignment needed) - **SPECIAL**: [label] - [reasoning] (if special handling needed) - **HIERARCHY**: [label] - [reasoning] (if part of hierarchy) - **COMMUNITY**: [label] - [reasoning] (if suitable for community) ### Reasoning [Explanation of why these labels were chosen based on: - Keywords found in title/description - Impact assessment - Urgency evaluation - Technical complexity - Resource requirements] ### Escalation Recommendations [If SEVERITY labels are applied, specify who should be notified] ### Suggested Next Steps 1. [Action 1] 2. [Action 2] 3. [Action 3] ``` --- ## Success Criteria ✅ All 8 test cases analyzed correctly ✅ Required labels (TYPE, PRIORITY, STATE) always present ✅ Optional labels only when applicable ✅ Reasoning clearly explains label choices ✅ Escalation recommendations for critical issues ✅ Suggested next steps provided ✅ Output format matches specification