Post merge

Post-Merge Workflow

Three phases: sync and clean the working tree, tidy up the issues the PR addressed, then recommend what to do next.

Phase 0: Sync and Clean the Working Tree

Do this first. Most post-merge rework comes from the next task starting against a stale base branch or a leftover feature branch/worktree — clean it up now while you have the context.

1. Find the base and head branches

Don't assume main. Read what the PR actually merged into:

gh pr view [NUMBER] --json number,title,baseRefName,headRefName,mergedAt

baseRefName is the branch to sync (often develop or main); headRefName is the merged feature branch to delete.

2. Sync the base branch

git fetch --prune
git checkout [BASE_BRANCH]
git pull --ff-only

If your current checkout is a worktree pinned to the merged feature branch, you can't switch it to the base — leave it and handle the worktree in step 3.

3. Delete the merged branch and its worktree

git worktree list                    # find any worktree holding the feature branch
git worktree remove [WORKTREE_PATH]  # only if it lives in a worktree
git branch -d [HEAD_BRANCH]          # safe delete — refuses if not actually merged

Use lowercase git branch -d; it only deletes branches that are fully merged. Don't reach for -D unless you've confirmed the work really landed. git worktree remove refuses to drop a worktree with uncommitted changes — don't --force past that without checking what's there first. If the project has a prune-merged-branches helper, use it (dry-run, then apply); those scripts typically skip develop/main/release/* and worktree-held branches.

4. Confirm clean state

git status
git branch --show-current

You want to be on the synced base branch, working tree clean, with the feature branch gone. Now move to Phase 1.

---

Phase 1: Issue Cleanup

Updating and closing the linked issues is the default, automatic outcome of this phase — do it without pausing to ask permission. The only judgment call is whether an issue is fully addressed (check its boxes and close it) or only partially (check boxes, comment, leave open). When the user says "the PRs are merged" with no numbers, first confirm which ones actually merged — a "they're all in" claim is often only partly true — and act only on the ones that did.

1. Get the PR

If the user gave you a PR number, use it. If they described it by name (or said "merged" with no number), find it:

gh pr list --state merged --limit 10

Then pull the details and confirm it actually merged before acting:

gh pr view [NUMBER] --json number,title,body,state,mergedAt,headRefName,closingIssuesReferences

Only proceed for PRs where state is MERGED. If the user named several, check each — don't take "they're merged" to mean all of them are.

2. Find linked issues

Check two places:

• closingIssuesReferences from the JSON above (GitHub auto-detects closing keywords) — but this is only populated when the PR targets the repo's default branch. For a PR merged into a non-default base (e.g. develop), it's empty and GitHub will NOT auto-close anything, so the manual comment + checkbox + close below is mandatory, not optional.
• Scan the PR body manually for patterns: closes #N, fixes #N, resolves #N, related to #N

If the user mentioned a specific issue in their message, include that too.

3. Update each linked issue

For each issue:

a) Get current state:

gh issue view [ISSUE_NUMBER] --json number,title,body,state,labels

b) Post a completion comment — keep it short, link the PR:

Addressed in PR #[NUMBER] — merged [date].

c) Update acceptance criteria checkboxes — if the issue body has a checklist and the PR clearly addressed specific items, edit the body to check them off. Only check what was actually delivered; leave unchecked items alone. Use gh issue edit [NUMBER] --body "..." with the updated text.

d) Close the issue if it's fully addressed (all checklist items done, or no checklist and the PR directly resolves it) — automatically, no confirmation:

gh issue close [ISSUE_NUMBER] --comment "Closed by #[PR_NUMBER]."

If the issue is only partially addressed, leave it open — just post the comment and check the relevant boxes.

e) Update any parent epic / tracking issue. If the closed issue shows up as a checklist line in an epic or meta-issue (e.g. - [ ] #61 ...), tick that line too so the epic reflects reality — fetch the epic body, flip the one line, and gh issue edit [EPIC] --body-file ....

4. Report what you did

One short summary: which issues were updated, which were closed, which were left open and why.

---

Phase 2: What's Next

1. Pull all open issues

gh issue list --state open --limit 100 --json number,title,labels,createdAt,body,milestone

If there are more than 100, paginate:

gh issue list --state open --limit 100 --json number,title,labels,createdAt,body,milestone --skip [N]

2. Score each issue

For each issue, assess these dimensions — you don't need to output scores, just use them to reason:

Value (higher = do sooner)

• Bug that breaks existing functionality → high
• Blocks other issues or unlocks a milestone → high
• User-facing improvement → medium
• Internal refactor / chore with no user impact → lower
• Labels like critical, blocking, P0 → boost

Effort (lower = do sooner, all else equal)

• Labels like good first issue, small, quick → low effort
• Labels like epic, large, needs-design → high effort
• Issue body describes a narrow, well-scoped change → low
• Issue body is vague or touches many systems → high

Age bonus

• Issues that have been open longer tend to get deprioritized unfairly. Give a small bonus to issues open more than a few weeks, and a bigger one for anything over a couple of months. This isn't a tiebreaker — a low-value chore open for 6 months still loses to a critical bug opened yesterday.

Context from the merged PR

• If the merged PR unblocks something specific (e.g., a dependency, an API, a design token), boost any issue that was waiting on it.
• Issues in the same area of the codebase as the just-merged work may be good to batch — you're already in context.

3. Pick one

Give a single recommendation. Not a ranked list — one issue, with 2-4 sentences explaining why it's the right call right now. The reasoning should be concrete: "this is a bug that affects X, it's well-scoped, and the PR you just merged sets up the infrastructure it needs" — not "high value, low effort."

If there's a genuinely close second worth knowing about, mention it in one sentence. Don't list the whole top 5.

4. Format

Next: #[NUMBER] — [title]

[2-4 sentence reasoning. Be specific about why now, why this one over the alternatives.]

(Alternatively: #[NUMBER] — [one sentence if there's a close second])

Keep it tight. The goal is a quick decision, not a planning session.