[Marius Storhaug (MariusStorhaug)]

The bug, patch, and general issue forms give direct instructions about the information to include. The prompts request the same information without courtesy filler, unbounded requests, or response-time promises. Users and maintainers need no configuration changes.

Changed: Issue forms state the information to include

The bug form asks for the problem and expected behavior, the software version used when the bug occurred, reproduction steps, code, and output. The patch form asks for the desired change. The general form asks for an issue description. The submission process and required information do not change.

Instructions remain imperative. The wording uses en-US, short active sentences, and stable technical terms. Past tense remains where the prompt refers to the reported bug or the behavior the contributor expected.

Prompt	Before	After
Bug introduction	"Thanks for taking the time" and "as much information as possible so we can help you quickly"	"Give information about the bug in the fields below."
Bug description	"what the bug is vs. what you expected to happen"	"Give a description of the bug and the behavior you expected."
Bug version	"What version of the software were you running when encountering the bug?"	"Give the software version you used when the bug occurred."
Code snippet	"help us understand what you're trying to do"	"Add a code snippet that shows the task you want to do."
Command output	"For powershell commands" and one combined run/paste instruction	PowerShell has the correct capitalization. The run instruction and "Paste the output here." are separate sentences.
Patch introduction and description	Courtesy text, a quick-help promise, and "what you would want to change"	"Give a description of the change in the field below." and "Give a description of what you want to change."
General introduction and description	Courtesy text, a quick-help promise, and "A clear and concise description."	"Give information about the issue in the field below." and "Give a description of the issue."

Technical details

Immutable scope and commits

The scoped comparison is PSModule/.github@4e0092de8f208b11e0d4607ced93471607aa748e to a6c020d4e2227397e4766f3f6daefb8d360116a6. GitHub and the pushed branch report that exact head. The full diff contains exactly three files, with 17 additions and 13 deletions. Ten existing prose values change: six in bug, two in patch, and two in general.

Commit	Result
6971f42fd6c5bada3fb7b7465255f1e9be1bf080	Give direct instructions for bug reports. Pushed before this draft opened and before patch/general edits.
a6c020d4e2227397e4766f3f6daefb8d360116a6	Give direct instructions for patch and general issues.

Only .github\ISSUE_TEMPLATE\01-bug.yml, 02-patch.yml, and 99-general.yml change. No test, snapshot, script, validator, dependency, hook, workflow, planning document, or other repository file is added or changed.

Preserved interfaces and evidence requests

The one-time read-only inspection parsed the baseline and exact final-head Git content with the installed YAML parser. It compared all keys and their order, scalar types, metadata, form names, chooser descriptions, title prefixes, declared labels, field types/order/IDs, textarea labels, required flags, and render values. Only the ten allowed introduction/description values differ. All comments and exact URLs match the baseline.

The bug field IDs remain description, version, steps-to-reproduce, code-snippet, and output, in that order. Patch/general each retain description. All seven textareas remain required. The exact render values remain powershell and Shell; the lowercase render identifier is not reader-facing prose.

The exact examples $PSVersionTable, Get-Module -ListAvailable -Name 'ModuleName', -Debug, and -Verbose match the baseline. Module version output, action/workflow version information, reproduction steps, intended-task code, and the relevant-output-or-workflow-run-link alternative remain in the prompts. No evidence requirement or technical plan is added.

The Git content of 10-feature.yml and config.yml is identical at the baseline and final head. blank_issues_enabled: true remains unchanged. Routing declarations and the other community files remain unchanged.

Static results and limits

Check	Before	Exact final head
yamllint --strict on the three owned forms	Exit 1: 16 line-length errors and 3 document-start warnings	Exit 1: 6 unchanged comment-URL line-length errors and 3 unchanged document-start warnings
One-time parsed/diff interface inspection	Baseline Git content is the comparison source	Exit 0: only the ten allowed prose values differ; all preserved interfaces and exact examples match
git diff --check across the full base-to-head diff	Clean baseline	Exit 0; clean worktree

The final diagnostics are identical in each file: line 1:81, 139 characters against limit 80; line 6:81, 142 characters against limit 80; and the missing document-start warning at 2:1. These fixed comment URLs and document starts are outside this prose Task. The ten prose line-length errors no longer occur. No diagnostic is hidden, no lint rule is weakened, and no unrelated line is changed. The baseline audit records every original diagnostic location and length.

These are static maintenance checks, not functional or live GitHub form validation. No live rendering, submission, label application, or routing test is executed. No test issue is submitted, and no simulated GitHub runtime or retained assertion suite is introduced.

Sources and standards review

All six required MSX pages are available and were read at MSXOrg/docs@1b0d4893c8fefabe604d04393068a8ff6f848082: Documentation Model, Natural Language, Writing Guide, Markdown, Documentation, and Spec-Driven Development Templates. The forms keep their native artifact format; this Task introduces no capability specification or design document. Repository README, AGENTS, contribution guidance, and the applicable YAML, PR-format, contribution, and commit standards were read.

The official STE explanation, FAQ, and Issue 9 DOI record are available. The local Issue 9 PDF MD5 is 9c720341c350ed77943b2c73d01c716f, which matches Zenodo. The review consulted the local rules and dictionary for active voice, short imperative instructions, and vocabulary choices. It preserves software terms and exact syntax. The manual and extracted text remain local. Prose inspection and lint do not certify full STE conformance.

The domain references are the unchanged GitHub issue-form syntax and form schema, including the Markdown and textarea interfaces.

Changed surface	Standards checked	Framework docs checked	Result
01-bug.yml introduction and descriptions	Fixed MSX writing/documentation baseline; YAML	GitHub issue-form syntax and form schema	Fixed in this PR (prose); exception: #87 for unchanged YAML diagnostics
02-patch.yml introduction and description	Fixed MSX writing/documentation baseline; YAML	GitHub issue-form syntax and form schema	Fixed in this PR (prose); exception: #87 for unchanged YAML diagnostics
99-general.yml introduction and description	Fixed MSX writing/documentation baseline; YAML	GitHub issue-form syntax and form schema	Fixed in this PR (prose); exception: #87 for unchanged YAML diagnostics

Task plan and review

• Read the owned forms and required sources; record baseline prose, source identity, static diagnostics, and interface expectations before editing.
• Commit and push bug prose, then open the focused draft before patch/general work.
• Commit and push patch/general prose as a separate small change.
• Inspect the full exact-head diff and parsed/static structure; run existing YAML and whitespace checks; preserve interfaces and command examples.
• Complete the writing/format review and record source-bound acceptance evidence in the Task audit trail and this PR.

The explicitly requested exact-head review approved a6c020d4e2227397e4766f3f6daefb8d360116a6 at 2026-11-04T12:24:49Z, with no active review issues and zero inline comments.

The scoped issue-convergence search inspected open PSModule/.github issues with ISSUE_TEMPLATE in their title/body. Besides this Task, it returned #87, #88, and #90. Their YAML-tooling, feature-form, and repository-entry-point outcomes are not delivered by this diff. No additional issue converges; #91 is the only closing delivery leaf. The separate YAML validation work is not a prerequisite and is not revived.

The source tree has no authored publishing workflow for this route, and this Task changes no versioned artifact or integration template. No release-decision block or release label applies. There is no delivery blocker within this prose scope. The known strict YAML diagnostics remain explicit out-of-scope limitations.

This PR remains draft, open, and unmerged for user review. Auto-merge is not enabled. Agent merge is disabled. User-directed draft retention replaces the standard ready/automatic-landing step.

Related references

• Resolves [documentation-writing-alignment] State community issue-form instructions directly #91
• References Feature requests start with the current situation and user value #89 for the unchanged feature form.
• References Align repository YAML validation with shared coding standards #87 for separate, unimplemented YAML validation work.
• References the fixed MSX writing baseline.
• References the official STE explanation, FAQ, and Issue 9.

[Copilot]

🟢 Approved

No active review issues are reported for the issue-template wording changes.

No open issues 🎉

What changed in this PR

This PR makes the repository’s bug, patch, and general issue forms more direct without changing the submission process.

Changes:

• Replaces courtesy filler and promises of quick help with direct instructions.
• Clarifies bug-report prompts and corrects the capitalization of PowerShell.
• Preserves fields, required flags, command examples, and routing.

File	Description
.github/​ISSUE_TEMPLATE/​99-general.yml	Simplifies the introduction and issue-description prompt.
.github/​ISSUE_TEMPLATE/​02-patch.yml	Makes instructions for describing a proposed change direct.
.github/​ISSUE_TEMPLATE/​01-bug.yml	Clarifies instructions for bug details, versions, reproduction steps, code, and output.

_{Review effort: Balanced}