Pull request writer
Skill WasDavidOliveira/irracional-skills/pull-request-writer
Agent Skills para Cursor & Claude Code: revisão crítica + APIs Bun/Elysia/Drizzle/Zod — padrões que o chat não “inventa” de novo a cada conversa.
npx -y skills add WasDavidOliveira/irracional-skills --skill pull-request-writerAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 0 stars0 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 author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when asked to write or review pull request descriptions, PR summaries, release notes from a PR, or changelog text based on a code diff, ensuring mandatory sections are complete, testable, and reviewer-friendly.
SKILL.md
3.6 KB, 743 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
PR Description
Overview
Write PR descriptions that are short, verifiable, and reviewer-friendly. Always include the required sections in the exact order.
Required Structure
Use this structure in every PR description, in this exact order:
Description of what was doneWhat was changedHow to testBreaking changes
Never omit sections.
Do not add sections before these four.
If optional content is not applicable, write N/A.
Output Contract (Strict)
- Use the exact section titles shown above.
- Keep the section order unchanged.
- Do not use nested bullets.
- Do not include generic placeholders like "general adjustments".
Writing Rules
- Prefer objective language and concrete behavior changes.
- Describe user and reviewer impact, not only implementation details.
- Keep bullets flat and scannable.
- Avoid vague statements without specifics.
- In
How to test, include reproducible steps and expected results. - Use simple language focused on clarity.
- Avoid unnecessary jargon, internal slang, or tool noise.
- Prioritize "what changed for users/reviewers" over implementation trivia.
Section Guidance
Description of what was done
Summarize intent and outcome in 2-4 lines. State what problem was solved and what behavior now exists. Invalid examples: "General refactor", "Various tweaks".
What was changed
List the main changes grouped by behavior or subsystem. Focus on relevant decisions and visible effects. Use 3-7 bullets. Each bullet should map to a concrete change.
How to test
Use mandatory format:
PrerequisitesStepsExpected result
Include manual and automated validation when applicable. Use numbered steps in execution order. Each expected result must be observable.
Breaking changes
Explicitly state compatibility impact:
None- or precise migration/action required by consumers
Use this matrix:
- If none: write
None. - If present, include:
ImpactWho needs to actRequired migrationTiming/recommendation
PR Type Variants
If PR is mostly frontend, include:
- affected navigation/routes
- UI states (loading/error/success)
- responsive and visual regression checks
If PR is mostly backend, include:
- changed endpoints/contracts
- changed business rules
- compatibility impact on consumers
If PR is mostly infrastructure, include:
- changed environment/configuration
- deploy/rollback impact
- operational risk and expected monitoring
Good vs Bad Examples
Description of what was done
Good: "Implements login with redirect to the requested route and clear temporary outage messaging." Bad: "Auth updates."
What was changed
Good: "- Extracted HTTP client into a shared layer with centralized error mapping." Bad: "- General improvements."
How to test
Good: "Numbered steps plus observable expected result for each step." Bad: "Test login and verify."
Breaking changes
Good: "None." Bad: "Might have impact."
Output Template
## Description of what was done
-
## What was changed
-
## How to test
### Prerequisites
-
### Steps
1.
2.
3.
### Expected result
-
## Breaking changes
-
Review Checklist
Before finalizing, verify:
- All required sections exist.
- Section titles are exact and ordered.
How to testis executable by another engineer.Breaking changesis explicit (never implicit).- Language is clear, objective, and low-jargon.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most pr commit review skills give in 743 tokens
Counted across 888 of the 1,342 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-07
- use conventional commits formatin 127 of 888, across 115 files
- keep subject line under 72 charactersin 62 of 888, across 48 files
- delete branches after mergein 51 of 888, across 38 files
- use imperative mood in subject linein 51 of 888, across 42 files
- use imperative mood in commit messagesin 44 of 888
- verify directory is ignored before creating worktreein 43 of 888, across 12 files
- generate a conventional commit messagein 43 of 888
- add unignored worktree directories to gitignorein 42 of 888, across 10 files
- make atomic commitsin 39 of 888, across 27 files
- run tests before committingin 36 of 888, across 25 files
- verify clean test baselinein 35 of 888, across 9 files
- split unrelated changes into separate commitsin 35 of 888, across 30 files
Said here and by no other author read
- Include required sections in exact order
- Never omit sections
- Write N/A for inapplicable optional content
- Use exact section titles
- Do not add sections before the four required ones
- Keep bullets flat and scannable
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.