name: Feature request
description: Propose a new handler, strategy, MCP tool, or capability.
title: "feat: "
labels: ["enhancement", "needs-triage"]
body:
- type: markdown
attributes:
value: |
Use this for **new** functionality. For tweaks to existing behaviour, file an _Improvement_ instead.
If this is a new command handler, prefer the template shape used in #35 — it makes the work estimable.
- type: textarea
id: problem
attributes:
label: Problem
description: What's currently suboptimal? Ideally a concrete example (command, output, missed compression opportunity, etc.).
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: proposal
attributes:
label: Proposal
description: What should squeez do? Be specific about scope and boundaries.
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: tradeoff
attributes:
label: Tradeoff
description: Maintenance cost, risk of over-fitting, incompatibility with existing handlers, etc.
- type: textarea
id: out_of_scope
attributes:
label: Out of scope
description: What you're explicitly _not_ asking for in this issue (deferred to follow-ups).
- type: dropdown
id: area
attributes:
label: Area
multiple: true
options:
- handler (new command)
- compression (dedup / grouping / truncation / smart_filter)
- context-engine (cache / redundancy / summarize / intensity)
- MCP server
- CI / release
- docs
- other
validations:
required: true
- type: checkboxes
id: confirm
attributes:
label: Confirmations
options:
- label: I've searched existing issues and this isn't a duplicate.
required: true
- label: This respects the zero-runtime-dependency rule (only `libc` allowed in `Cargo.toml`).
required: true