Add repo-scoped support to list_issue_types tool

[kelsey-myers]

Summary

Adds optional repo parameter to list_issue_types so coding/cloud agents can list issue types using only metadata:read instead of org:read.

Closeshttps://github.com/github/plan-track-agentic-toolkit/issues/125

depends on https://github.com/github/github/pull/436186

Why

Cloud agent / SWE agent / coding agent don't have the org scope, which blocked them from using list_issue_types. Matches the list_issue_fields implementation

What changed

• list_issue_types now accepts an optional repo param. With repo set, calls GET /repos/{owner}/{repo}/issue-types; without it, falls back to the existing GET /orgs/{owner}/issue-types path.
• requiredScopes widened from [ReadOrg] to [Repo, ReadOrg] (OR semantics), so the tool surfaces for tokens with either scope.
• Description tightened to make the choice explicit for agents.
• IFC label on the repo path follows the repo's visibility (via attachRepoVisibilityIFCLabelLazy), mirroring list_issue_fields. Org path keeps the conservative private label.
• Adjusted docs generator to address confusing implication when listing multiple required token scopes

MCP impact

• Tool schema or behavior changed
  • Schema: owner still required, new optional repo. No breaking changes.
  • Behavior: added a code path; existing org-only callers unaffected.

Prompts tested (tool changes only)

Tested end-to-end against a local dotcom monolith (with the backing endpoint behind a per-repo feature flag) using a FGPAT with only metadata:read:

• "List the issue types for github/public-server" → returns Task, Bug, Feature
• "List issue types for GITHUB/PUBLIC-SERVER" → returns same (case-insensitive)
• "List issue types for github/does-not-exist" → surfaces 404 cleanly
• Repo-level disable for one type → that type is correctly filtered from the response
• "List the issue types for the github org" (no repo) → org path unchanged

Security / limits

• Auth / permissions considered
  • Repo path is gated by metadata:read (matches :issue_type_reader role semantics in dotcom). No new data exposure: only enabled issue types reachable for the actor are returned. Token scope filtering is OR (either repo or read:org is sufficient), confirmed by HasRequiredScopes semantics.

Tool renaming

• I am not renaming tools as part of this PR

Lint & tests

• Linted locally with ./script/lint
• Tested locally with ./script/test

Added 2 new sub-tests to Test_ListIssueTypes (successful_repo_issue_types_retrieval, repo_not_found).

Docs

• Updated (README / docs / examples)

Regenerated via script/generate-docs after the schema change. Also updated the list_issue_types.snap toolsnap.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR extends the list_issue_types MCP tool to support a repo-scoped API path so agents can list issue types with repo-level access (e.g., metadata:read) instead of requiring org-level access (read:org).

Changes:

• Added an optional repo parameter to list_issue_types and implemented a GET /repos/{owner}/{repo}/issue-types code path, falling back to the existing org endpoint when omitted.
• Broadened the tool’s scope gating to allow visibility with either repo or read:org, and applied repo-visibility-based IFC labeling for the repo path.
• Updated tests, toolsnap snapshot, and generated README tool documentation to reflect the schema/behavior change.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
README.md	Updates generated tool docs for list_issue_types to include new repo param and updated scope requirements.
pkg/github/issues.go	Adds repo-scoped issue type listing logic and updates tool schema/description/scope gating + IFC labeling.
pkg/github/issues_test.go	Adds new subtests covering repo-scoped success and repo-not-found error behavior.
pkg/github/toolsnaps/list_issue_types.snap	Updates tool schema snapshot for the new optional repo input and updated descriptions.
pkg/errors/error_test.go	Formatting-only import ordering / trailing whitespace cleanup.

Copilot's findings

• Files reviewed: 5/5 changed files
• Comments generated: 1

[kelsey-myers]

096cdb5

[RossTarrant]

Looks great! Just two comments, let me know your thoughts!

[RossTarrant]

Does this description need updating to reflect the changes you are making? I feel like it might need tweaking a bit but open to discussion on this! 😄

[kelsey-myers]

Makes sense! Let me know if this is clear: 9fa8dce

[RossTarrant]

Same with this one as my previous comment, again open to discussion on this!