agentleFS
0xErwin10xErwin1/dbflux/skills/branch-pr/SKILL.md

branch-pr

Skill526 starsChanged 6 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Create pull requests for DBFlux using the repository's actual PR template and review expectations. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing a branch for review.

  • Commits and pushes

5 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use chained-pr, work-unit-commits and 3 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • joeldevzSkill

    chained-pr

    Split large changes (>400 lines OR >5 slices) into a series of reviewable PRs. Two strategies — stacked-to-main and feature-branch-chain. Prevents the 100-conflict merge disaster.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • joeldevzSkill

    work-unit-commits

    Commit discipline. Each commit is a self-contained, reviewable work unit — code + tests + docs together. Stops the 190-commit PR disaster before it starts.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • alex-ilgayevSkill

    go-testing

    Handles all Golang testing tasks including running tests, writing new tests, and fixing test failures. Follows MCPSpy testing conventions with require for critical assertions and assert for non-critical ones.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +2 more from joeldevz

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 1

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Use project guidance from AGENTS.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, and CODE_STYLE.md

    line 23
  2. Distinctive:

    Follow the repository template sections exactly when composing the PR body

    line 29
  3. Very specific:

    Do not invent labels such as area:*.

    line 35

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

When to Use

  • Opening a new PR for DBFlux
  • Preparing branch changes for review
  • Turning local work into a reviewable GitHub PR

Repository Facts

  • The PR template lives at .github/pull_request_template.md
  • The template sections are: Summary, What does this resolve?, How was this solved?, Validation, Where was this tested?, Checklist, and Labels to apply
  • The checklist in the template has five items, including the CHANGELOG.md and label ones — carry all of them over
  • Labels to apply is part of the template: it is where the PR names the labels the change needs
  • Labels come from the taxonomy in CONTRIBUTING.md § Label Guide (ui:bug, ui:feature, driver:bug, driver:postgres, platform:linux, kind:sql, …); there is no area:* convention
  • Labels live on the upstream repository, so a contributor pushing from a fork cannot apply them: state them in the body and let a maintainer apply them during triage
  • Use project guidance from AGENTS.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, and CODE_STYLE.md

Critical Patterns

  • Inspect git status, branch state, recent commits, and the diff against the base branch before drafting the PR
  • Base the PR description on the full branch delta, not only on the latest commit
  • Follow the repository template sections exactly when composing the PR body
  • In Validation, include only commands or scenarios that were actually run
  • In Where was this tested?, mark only real environments; do not claim coverage that did not happen
  • Reference linked issues only when they actually exist; do not invent issue requirements
  • For a feature or behavior change, check that the linked issue carries the status:approved label before opening the PR; a bug fix does not need it and a PR by the maintainer may skip the check
  • Keep each PR around 400 changed lines; split larger work into independent PRs that branch from main rather than stacks, since PRs are squash-merged. New or substantially rewritten code keeps functions under ~100 lines and files under ~1000 lines of production code, with tests in the module's tests submodule. A change that pushes a file past ~1000 lines of production code splits it into a module directory in the same PR, or opens an issue for the split alongside it; files already over the limit are exempt until refactored
  • Do not invent labels such as area:*; take them from the taxonomy in CONTRIBUTING.md
  • State the labels the change needs in Labels to apply, and do not silently drop the section when the author has no write access to apply them
  • Push with git push -u origin <branch> if the branch is not yet tracked

Suggested PR Body

## Summary

- Brief summary of the change

## What does this resolve?

- Resolves #123

## How was this solved?

Short explanation of the approach and tradeoffs.

## Validation

- `cargo check --workspace`
- Manual scenario: ...

## Where was this tested?

- [x] Local development environment
- [ ] Automated tests
- [ ] Linux
- [ ] macOS
- [ ] Windows
- [ ] X11
- [ ] Wayland
- [ ] Other:

## Checklist

- [x] I verified the change against the affected user flow(s)
- [x] I added or updated tests when needed
- [x] I documented follow-up work or known limitations when applicable
- [x] I updated `CHANGELOG.md` under `## [Unreleased]` if this is user-visible
- [x] I applied the appropriate labels (see `CONTRIBUTING.md` § Label Guide)

## Labels to apply

`ui:feature`, `platform:linux`

Pushing from a fork, the last checklist item cannot be ticked by the author: say so where the PR states its labels, and ask a maintainer to apply them.

Commands

# Inspect branch state before creating the PR
git status
git diff --stat
git log --oneline --decorate --graph origin/main..HEAD

# Push branch if needed (to the fork when the author has no write access upstream)
git push -u origin <branch>

# Create the PR against the upstream repository
gh pr create --repo 0xErwin1/dbflux --base main --head <owner>:<branch> --body-file /tmp/pr.md

Resources

  • .github/pull_request_template.md
  • .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/
  • CONTRIBUTING.md
  • AGENTS.md
  • ARCHITECTURE.md
  • CODE_STYLE.md

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.