Reopen and re-drive a previously closed GitHub plan issue after review/governance blockers are fixed, without prematurely restoring approval state.
Scanned 9/9/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add vamseeachanta/workspace-hub --skill closed-issue-plan-refile-loop --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Closed Issue Plan Refile Loop?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/vamseeachanta-closed-issue-plan-refile-loop-workspace-hub)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: closed-issue-plan-refile-loop
description: Reopen and re-drive a previously closed GitHub plan issue after review/governance blockers are fixed, without prematurely restoring approval state.
version: 1.0.0
category: coordination
tags: [planning, github, review, governance, refile]
---
# Closed-Issue Plan Re-file Loop
Use when a plan issue was previously closed or parked because of review infrastructure limits, governance drift, or other meta blockers, and you need to revive it safely.
## When this fits
- A plan issue was closed with preserved artifacts
- A later infrastructure/governance fix makes re-review worthwhile
- You need to reopen the issue, revise the plan, run a fresh adversarial review wave, and avoid falsely surfacing it as approval-ready
## Core pattern
1. Recover prior state
- Read the preserved local plan
- Read prior review artifacts and closure/governance comments
- Verify live issue state with `gh issue view`
- Verify current repo reality for any facts the old plan depended on
2. Rewrite as a conservative re-file draft
- Keep the same canonical local plan file if it is still the source of truth
- Change the header/status to `draft`, not `plan-review`
- Add revision history explaining why the new draft exists
- Remove stale claims about prior issue state, missing artifacts, or old blocker assumptions
- Convert previous review findings into explicit plan sections/contracts instead of leaving them as comments only
3. Reopen the GitHub issue before fresh review
- Reopen with a comment explaining the re-file basis
- Reopening does NOT imply the plan is approval-ready
4. Run a fresh adversarial review wave immediately
- Generate new provider artifacts (at minimum Codex; Gemini if available)
- Treat fresh MAJOR findings as authoritative over the reopened state
- Expect iterative tightening; a reopened issue often still needs multiple passes
5. Keep governance state conservative until the review wave is green
- Do NOT restore `status:plan-review` just because the issue was reopened
- Do NOT recreate approval-ready posture while fresh review still returns MAJOR
- Post a governance comment summarizing the latest artifacts and current blocker themes
- Update `docs/plans/README.md` to reflect the reopened draft state, e.g. `draft (vN re-file in progress)`
6. Commit only the planning artifacts
- Stage explicit paths only
- Commit plan file + README row + new review artifacts together
- Push and verify `origin/main` contains the new planning state
## Practical lessons
- Reopening an issue is cheap; restoring approval-state labels is not. Separate those actions.
- Fresh review artifacts outrank stale closed-state summaries.
- A preserved plan file can remain the canonical path, but its header and README row must be updated to match the reopened draft reality.
- A GitHub comment linking fresh review artifacts is important so the live issue reflects why it is reopened yet still not approval-ready.
## Minimal verification
- `gh issue view NNN --json state,labels,comments`
- `git status --short`
- `git rev-parse HEAD origin/main`
- confirm new review artifact files exist
- confirm README row matches the reopened/draft state
## Example outcomes
Good end state after a first re-file pass:
- issue reopened
- local plan revised to `draft`
- fresh Codex/Gemini review artifacts added
- governance comment posted
- no `status:plan-review` label yet if MAJOR findings remain
Only after the fresh review wave is approval-ready should the issue advance back into the normal `status:plan-review` -> user approval flow.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!