File a follow-up issue

You discovered work that is real and worth doing, but doesn't belong in the current PR. Park it as a GitHub issue with enough context that a future session can pick it up cold and open its own PR — then get back to the current PR without touching it.

Gate — all three must hold

Only file an issue when all are true:

1. The current PR is complete and stable — it closes its original issue; this discovery is not needed for that.
2. The discovery is real and net-positive — a genuine bug or improvement, not a nitpick.
3. It's non-trivial and out of scope — fixing it here would add its own design decisions, carry unresolved uncertainty, or widen the diff's blast radius past what the issue needed.

If a gate fails, do the alternative and stop — don't file:

• Trivial and in-scope → just fix it in this PR.
• In-scope but larger → it belongs in this PR's plan, not a new issue.
• Not actually a real problem → drop it (or, if it's a review thread, dismiss it).

Steps

1. Dedup. Search for an existing issue before creating:

   gh issue list --state all --search "<3-5 distinctive keywords>" --limit 20
   

   If a clear match exists, link to it instead of creating a duplicate — and skip to step 4 (log) referencing the existing issue. Preserve that issue's ownership and routing labels. Deduplication does not authorize a new route.

2. Confirm before creating (outward action). Show the user the drafted title + body and get a yes.

3. Create with the template below: Both title and body quote code and reviewer text, where $(...) and backticks would be expanded by the shell before gh ever runs. Write each to its own file with your editor tool, then load the title through cat — a shell variable's contents are not reparsed for substitution:

   title=$(cat <path to the title file you wrote>)
   gh issue create --title "$title" --body-file <path to the body file you wrote>
   

   Apply the maintainer routing mechanics for a maintainer's selected route.

4. Log the deferral in pr-decisions.md so the current PR's reviewers see why this was parked rather than fixed: For a newly created maintainer issue, include the selected route and human owner (or no local owner) in the decision. Bind contributor-derived fields with quoted heredocs, as in adopt-pr. This also applies when deduplication skipped issue creation and Step 3 has no bound title. Never paste contributor text into double-quoted command arguments.

title=$(cat <<'EOF'
defer: <short title of discovery>
EOF
)
decision=$(cat <<'EOF'
Filed as #<N> instead of fixing here
EOF
)
why=$(cat <<'EOF'
Out of scope for this PR — <decisions / uncertainty / blast-radius, pick one>
EOF
)
source=$(cat <<'EOF'
<new issue URL>
EOF
)
.agents/skills/branch-context/append-pr-decision.sh \
  --title "$title" --decision "$decision" --why "$why" --source "$source"

5. Report the issue URL. Do not expand the current PR — that's the whole point.

Maintainer routing mechanics

For issues filed on a maintainer's behalf, honor their chosen route; otherwise ask which route they want. Combine this choice with draft approval when both are needed. This routing also applies to non-follow-up issues. Confirm labels against the checked-in catalog before using them; a missing label fails the command.

• General queue: create without --assignee or pydanty:skip, then run gh issue edit <issue-number> --add-label pydanty:triage-issue. This explicitly requests Pydanty triage, which team-authored issues otherwise skip.
• Immediate work: create with --assignee <maintainer-login> --label pydanty:skip. Assign the human maintainer who owns the work. The label suppresses Pydanty triage and retry-pr triggers. Carry that ownership onto the PR using the PR skill.

Do not apply these maintainer routes for an external contributor. External contributors cannot apply repository labels, so leave their issues in normal triage.

Issue body template

## Background
<what we were doing and where this surfaced; link the originating PR>

## The problem
<the bug or improvement, concrete and specific>

## Why it's out of scope for the originating PR
<the specific reason: own design decisions, unresolved uncertainty, or blast radius>

## Where
- `path/to/file.py` — `Class.method`   <!-- filepath + symbol, no line numbers -->

## Suggested direction (low-confidence)
<optional starting point — mark clearly as a lead, not a decision. Omit if you have none.>