docs(issue-template): ask for a numbered list of reproduction steps

[ryan-crabbe-berri]

Relevant issues

Linear ticket

Pre-Submission checklist

Please complete all items before asking a LiteLLM maintainer to review your PR

• I have added meaningful tests
• My PR passes all CI/CD checks (e.g., lint, format, unit tests)
• My PR's scope is as isolated as possible; it only solves 1 specific problem
• I have received a Greptile Confidence Score of at least 4/5 before requesting a maintainer review (Greptile reviews automatically once the PR is opened; only comment @greptileai to re-request a review after pushing changes)

Type

📖 Documentation

Changes

Updates the "Steps to Reproduce" field description in the bug report issue template to explicitly ask reporters for a numbered list of the exact steps, in order (1., 2., 3., ...), alongside a curl/python snippet. The prefilled numbered skeleton in the field value was already there; this makes the expectation clear in the description so reporters actually number their steps instead of pasting a wall of prose

Final Attestation

• The tests check the right things, including the edge cases, and regressions in the respective real-world customer use-cases are not possible after this PR

[greptile-apps]

Greptile Summary

This PR clarifies the reproduction guidance in the bug-report issue template. The change includes:

• A request for an ordered, numbered list of exact reproduction steps
• A request for a curl or Python reproduction snippet

Confidence Score: 5/5

This looks safe to merge.

• No blocking issues found in the changed text.
• The YAML field remains valid and matches the existing numbered placeholder.

Important Files Changed

Filename	Overview
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml	Clarifies the Steps to Reproduce description while preserving the existing YAML structure and numbered placeholder

_{Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "docs(issue-template): ask for a numbered..." | Re-trigger Greptile}

[mateo-berri]

!sknahT; MTGL

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 31 untouched benchmarks

---

_{Comparing litellm_issue_template_repro_steps (0fd3408) with litellm_internal_staging (2b2ae4c)¹}

Footnotes

1. No successful run was found on litellm_internal_staging (e967bc8) during the generation of this report, so 2b2ae4c was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩