Skip to content

Conversation

Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI commented Nov 12, 2025

The add command's short description used ambiguous terminology "from the components" which was inconsistent with the long description and documentation that refer to "repositories".

Changes

  • Updated pkg/cli/add_command.go line 25:
    - Short: "Add one or more workflows from the components to .github/workflows",
    + Short: "Add workflows from repositories to .github/workflows",

Result

Help output now uses clear, standard Git/GitHub terminology:

$ gh aw --help
Available Commands:
  add         Add workflows from repositories to .github/workflows

Addresses issue raised in CLI consistency checker report.

Original prompt

This section details on the original issue you should resolve

<issue_title>[cli-consistency] Unclear terminology in add command: "from the components" should be "from repositories"</issue_title>
<issue_description>## Issue Description

Command: gh aw add
Type: Unclear terminology in help text
Priority: Low (minor clarity issue)

Problem

The add command's short description uses the phrase "from the components" which is unclear and potentially confusing.

Current Help Text (pkg/cli/add_command.go):

Short: "Add one or more workflows from the components to .github/workflows",

Issue

  • "from the components" is ambiguous - what are "the components"?
  • The Long description says "from repositories" which is clearer
  • Documentation refers to "The Agentics collection" or "repositories"

Suggested Fix

Make the short description clearer and consistent with the long description:

- Short: "Add one or more workflows from the components to .github/workflows",
+ Short: "Add one or more workflows from repositories to .github/workflows",

Or, even shorter:

- Short: "Add one or more workflows from the components to .github/workflows",
+ Short: "Add workflows from repositories to .github/workflows",

This aligns with the Long description which already says "from repositories".

File to Modify

  • pkg/cli/add_command.go (line 3 in NewAddCommand function)

AI generated by CLI Consistency Checker</issue_description>

Comments on the Issue (you are @copilot in this section)

@pelikhan use shorter version

💡 You can make Copilot smarter by setting up custom instructions, customizing its development environment and configuring Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. Learn more Copilot coding agent tips in the docs.

Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot AI changed the title [WIP] Fix unclear terminology in CLI add command Fix unclear terminology in add command: "components" → "repositories" Nov 12, 2025
Copilot AI requested a review from pelikhan November 12, 2025 06:35
@pelikhan pelikhan marked this pull request as ready for review November 12, 2025 06:37
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings November 12, 2025 06:37
@pelikhan pelikhan merged commit 2014587 into main Nov 12, 2025
75 of 79 checks passed
@pelikhan pelikhan deleted the copilot/fix-cli-add-command-terminology branch November 12, 2025 06:39
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

This PR improves the clarity and consistency of the add command's help text by replacing ambiguous terminology "from the components" with the clearer "from repositories".

  • Updated the Short description to use standard Git/GitHub terminology
  • Ensured consistency between Short and Long command descriptions
  • Followed the suggestion to use the shorter, more concise version

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[cli-consistency] Unclear terminology in add command: "from the components" should be "from repositories"

2 participants