Aw/relevance check

[brunoborges]

Triggered by a slash command, and summarized by a manual flow.

Pull Request Checklist

• I have read and followed the CONTRIBUTING.md guidelines.
• My contribution adds a new instruction, prompt, agent, skill, or workflow file in the correct directory.
• The file follows the required naming convention.
• The content is clearly structured and follows the example format.
• I have tested my instructions, prompt, agent, skill, or workflow with GitHub Copilot.
• I have run npm start and verified that README.md is up to date.

---

Description

1. relevance-check.md — A slash command (/relevance-check) that maintainers can invoke on any issue or PR. It
   uses Copilot to read the item's full context, inspect the current codebase, and post a comment with a Relevance
   Assessment (Still Relevant / Likely Outdated / Needs Discussion) along with evidence and a recommended action
   (keep open, consider closing, or needs maintainer input). Restricted to admin/maintainer/write roles; read-only
   permissions.
2. relevance-summary.md — A manually triggered (workflow_dispatch) workflow that scans all open issues/PRs for
   existing /relevance-check responses and compiles them into a single summary issue with a table and statistics. It
   auto-closes older summary issues via close-older-issues: true.

Together they form a two-step triage system: run /relevance-check on individual items over time, then periodically
generate a rollup report to help maintainers batch-close stale items.

---

Type of Contribution

• New instruction file.
• New prompt file.
• New agent file.
• New plugin.
• New skill file.
• New agentic workflow.
• Update to existing instruction, prompt, agent, plugin, skill, or workflow.
• Other (please specify):

---

Additional Notes

Nothing to add further.

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution abides by the Code of Conduct and will be licensed under the MIT License.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This pull request adds two new agentic workflows for issue and PR relevance management. The workflows implement a two-step triage system: maintainers can invoke /relevance-check on individual items, and then periodically run a summary workflow to generate consolidated reports of all checked items.

Changes:

• Adds relevance-check.md workflow triggered by slash command to evaluate issue/PR relevance
• Adds relevance-summary.md workflow triggered manually to compile summary reports
• Updates docs/README.workflows.md to document both new workflows

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
workflows/relevance-check.md	New slash command workflow for evaluating individual issue/PR relevance with maintainer-only access
workflows/relevance-summary.md	New manually-triggered workflow to aggregate all relevance check results into a summary issue
docs/README.workflows.md	Adds table entries for both new workflows with descriptions and trigger information

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

workflows/relevance-check.md:7

• The roles field appears to be at the wrong indentation level in the YAML frontmatter. Currently, it's at the root level of the frontmatter (same level as on, engine, permissions), but based on typical workflow syntax, it should likely be nested under the slash_command trigger configuration or under the on section.

The parser extracts triggers only from keys within the on field, so the current structure means roles won't be properly associated with the slash command trigger. Please verify the correct structure according to the GitHub Agentic Workflows specification.

on:
  slash_command:
    name: relevance-check
  roles: [admin, maintainer, write]

docs/README.workflows.md:37

• The triggers column shows "slash_command, roles", but based on the workflow metadata parser (eng/yaml-parser.mjs lines 278-285), triggers are extracted only from keys within the on field. Since roles is not a key under on in the workflow file, it won't be automatically extracted by the build script.

This suggests the README entry may have been manually edited rather than generated by running npm run build. Please verify that the README was generated correctly by the build script and matches what the parser would extract from the workflow frontmatter.

| [Relevance Check](../workflows/relevance-check.md) | Slash command to evaluate whether an issue or pull request is still relevant to the project | slash_command, roles |