code-owners

Identify who owns, maintains, or has expertise in a specific code area — use when asked who to talk to about a system, who to request a code review from, or who has been actively working in a codebase area.

Quality

83%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Code Owners

Identify who owns, maintains, or has expertise in a specific code area.

Determine the component or codebase area from the user's request. If not specified, ask before proceeding.

Core Principles

Multi-signal identification: Code + docs + org structure = complete picture
Recency matters: Active maintainers are more useful than historical authors
Be skeptical: Just having commits doesn't mean they're the right contact
Quality over quantity: 2-3 right people beats 10 tangential names

Process

Phase 1: Find Recent Contributors

Search for who's been actively working on this code:

code_search "[component] owner:* updated:past_month"
code_search "[component] from:* updated:past_3_months"

Phase 2: Find Historical Authors

Look for original authors and significant contributors:

code_search "[component] owner:* after:2023-01-01"

Phase 3: Find Related Documentation Authors

People who wrote the docs often have deep knowledge:

search "[component] design doc OR architecture owner:*"
search "[component] RFC owner:*"

Phase 4: Cross-Reference with Org Info

Get current roles and contact info:

employee_search "[contributor names]"

Phase 5: Vet Each Candidate

For each person found, evaluate:

Test	✅ Active Owner	⚠️ Consider	❌ Reject
Ownership	Multiple commits in past 3 months, reviews PRs	Occasional activity, still relevant	Single commit, tangential involvement
Relevance	Same team, same area	Changed teams but retains context	Left company, completely different area
Knowledge	Wrote design docs, significant PRs, in CODEOWNERS	Regular contributor, knows the code	Minor commits, typo fixes
Contact	Owns the code, expects questions	Knowledgeable but busy/senior — suggest alternatives first	Would be surprised to be contacted

Phase 6: Present Vetted Ownership Map

# Code Ownership: [Component]

## Vetting Summary
| Candidates Found | Active Owners | Historical | Rejected |
|------------------|---------------|------------|----------|
| [X] | [Y] | [Z] | [W] |

## Primary Contacts (Recommended)

### 1. [Name] — [Title]
**Confidence**: High
- **Why**: Most active contributor, [X] commits in past month
- **Good for**: Day-to-day questions, PR reviews
- **Last active**: [date]
- **Contact**: [email]

## Secondary Contacts
| Name | Role | Why Secondary | Contact |
|------|------|---------------|---------|
| [Name] | [Title] | Moved to [team] but retains context | [email] |

## Historical Contributors
| Name | Contribution | Current Role | Last Active |
|------|--------------|--------------|-------------|
| [Name] | Original author | Now on [team] | [date] |

## Team Ownership
- **Team**: [team name]
- **Manager**: [name]
- **Slack channel**: [channel] (may be faster than individual outreach)

## Rejected Candidates
| Name | Reason |
|------|--------|
| [Name] | Single commit — typo fix only |
| [Name] | Left company |

If No Clear Owners Found

# Code Ownership: [Component]

## Ownership Unclear

Could not identify clear owners for this component.

**Possible explanations:**
- Ownership may be implicit within a team
- Code may be unmaintained/legacy

**Suggested next steps:**
1. Check the repository's CODEOWNERS or MAINTAINERS file directly
2. Look at recent PR reviewers as a proxy
3. Ask in [relevant Slack channel]

Repository: gleanwork/claude-plugins
Path: plugins/glean/skills/code-owners/SKILL.md
Commit: a549de6

Last updated: 5 days ago
First committed: 4 months ago

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.