Pr description
Write a clear, scannable pull request description from a diff or branch. Use when the user asks to draft a PR description, summarize a branch, prepare a change for review, or fill out a PR template.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add kwhorne/elyra-skills --skill pr-descriptionAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its file declares
Copied from the file, not written here
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
3.5 KB, 807 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
PR Description
A reviewer should be able to answer "what changed and why" in 30 seconds. That's the whole goal.
When to use
- "Write a PR description for this branch"
- "Summarize what's in this PR"
- "Fill out the PR template"
- "Draft a pull request"
Procedure
-
Identify the change set. Default to
git diff <base>...HEADwhere<base>is the merge target (usuallymain/master/develop).git fetch origin BASE=$(git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's@^refs/remotes/origin/@@' || echo main) git log --oneline "origin/$BASE..HEAD" git diff --stat "origin/$BASE...HEAD" -
Look for an existing template. Check
.github/pull_request_template.mdordocs/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md. If found, follow its structure; otherwise use the default below. -
Read the diff itself, not just commit messages. Commit messages lie or lag; the diff is truth.
-
Identify:
- The one sentence that summarizes the change (this is the PR title)
- The why — problem, context, motivation
- The what — what actually changed, grouped logically (not file-by-file)
- Anything reviewer-visible: API changes, migrations, env vars, breaking changes
- Verification steps the reviewer can run
-
Draft. Then trim. First draft is always too long. Cut anything the diff already shows.
Default template
## Summary
<one or two sentences — the elevator pitch>
## Why
<problem this solves, links to issues/discussions>
Closes: #123
## Changes
- <grouped logical change>
- <another grouped logical change>
- <…>
## How to verify
1. <concrete step a reviewer can run>
2. <…>
## Notes for reviewer
<anything non-obvious: tricky bits, deliberate trade-offs, things you want extra eyes on>
## Risk & rollout
<breaking changes, migrations, feature flags, env vars, deploy order>
Drop sections that don't apply. A docs PR doesn't need "Risk & rollout."
Title
<type>(<scope>): <imperative summary> if the project uses Conventional Commits, otherwise a clear imperative sentence ≤72 chars. No trailing period.
✅ feat(auth): support passwordless email login
✅ Fix race condition in cache invalidation
❌ Updates
❌ WIP - some changes to auth
Anti-patterns
- ❌ Listing files changed — the diff already does that
- ❌ "Various fixes and improvements" — useless to reviewer and to future archaeology
- ❌ Copy-pasting commit messages as the body
- ❌ Hiding breaking changes in the middle of a bullet list
- ❌ "Tested locally ✅" without saying what was tested
- ❌ Putting the "why" only in a linked issue — the reviewer should not need to context-switch
Tips
- Screenshots / before-after are gold for UI changes
- Migration notes: if a consumer needs to do something, put it in its own section with a
⚠️so it can't be missed - Stacked PRs: link to the parent and explicitly say "depends on #N"
- Draft PRs: prefix the summary with what's still TODO before review is welcome
- If the PR ended up doing more than one thing, suggest splitting before writing the description — it'll be a better PR
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.