update-pr-description
Skill5 starsChanged 17 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when user says 'update PR description', 'refresh PR description', 'fix PR description', 'rewrite PR body', 'update my PR', or types /update-pr-description
- Commits and pushes
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- storybookjs/storybooktheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- storybookjs/storybook★ 91ksame name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository50 other files it gives its agents.
- analyze-pr-commentsSkill
- architecture-analyzeSkill
- architecture-tradeoffSkill
- askSkill
- code-smellsSkill
- debugging-rocprof-sysSkill
- exploration-explore-codeSkill
- git-commitSkill
- git-gh-clientSkill
- git-prepare-pull-requestSkill
- git-pull-request-statusSkill
- gitSkill
- grill-meSkill
- library-amd-smiSkill
- notify-meSkill
- planning-architectureSkill
- planning-baseSkill
- planning-bugfixSkill
- planning-docsSkill
- planning-featureSkill
- planning-refactorSkill
- programming-cmake-best-practicesSkill
- programming-cpp-constexprSkill
- programming-cpp-design-patternsSkill
- programming-cpp-naming-rulesSkill
- programming-cpp-policy-based-diSkill
- programming-cppSkill
- programming-cpp-stl-algorithmsSkill
- programming-pythonSkill
- pr-review-interactiveSkill
- pr-reviewSkill
- radisha-create-skillSkill
- radisha-helpSkill
- radisha-improve-skillSkill
- radisha-skillsSkill
- radisha-updateSkill
- refactoring-techniquesSkill
- review-architectureSkill
- rocprofsys-buildSkill
- rocprofsys-configureSkill
- rocprofsysSkill
- static-analysisSkill
- testing-gtest-gmockSkill
- testing-pytestSkill
- testing-testplanSkill
- therock-build-to-commitSkill
- therock-commit-in-buildSkill
- therock-first-build-with-commitSkill
- verify-pmc-metricsSkill
- watchSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈5
Distinctive · estimate
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
- Distinctive: line 8
Read the current PR description and branch changes, then produce an updated description that accurately reflects what is on the branch.
- Very specific: line 26
NEVER hardcode
mainas base branch: Always read baseRefName from the PR. - Distinctive: line 46
Do NOT discard user-written Motivation — it captures domain context the code cannot express.
- Distinctive: line 64
Do NOT wrap prose at 80 characters: Write each paragraph as a single continuous line.
- Distinctive: line 68
ALWAYS show the diff before applying: Never silently overwrite.
- Very specific: line 82
Use AskUserQuestion with a Yes/No question before applying:
- Distinctive: line 89
Only proceed if the user selects Yes.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Update PR Description
Read the current PR description and branch changes, then produce an updated description that accurately reflects what is on the branch. Always edit in-place — never recreate the PR.
Process
Phase 0: Verify GitHub CLI
gh auth statusPhase 1: Read Current PR State
gh pr view --json number,title,body,baseRefName,headRefNameExtract: PR number, existing body (may be empty), base branch, head branch.
NEVER hardcode main as base branch. Always read baseRefName from the PR.
Phase 2: Analyze Branch Changes
BASE=$(gh pr view --json baseRefName -q .baseRefName)
HEAD=$(gh pr view --json headRefName -q .headRefName)
git log --oneline "$BASE".."$HEAD" # Commit history → Motivation
git diff --stat "$BASE".."$HEAD" # File stats → Technical Details
git diff --name-only "$BASE".."$HEAD" # File list → Test PlanPhase 3: Decide How to Handle Existing Description
| Situation | Action |
| Body is empty or placeholder | Generate fresh from branch analysis |
| Body has real content | Preserve user-written Motivation, update Technical Details and Test Plan from diff |
Do NOT discard user-written Motivation — it captures domain context the code cannot express.
Phase 4: Draft the Description
## Motivation
<Why this change — problem being solved, user need, or context>
## Technical Details
<Key implementation decisions, trade-offs, architecture changes>
## Test Plan
- [ ] <how this was tested>
- [ ] <edge cases verified>Reference actual commits, files, and decisions — never use generic filler text.
Do NOT wrap prose at 80 characters. Write each paragraph as a single continuous line. Hard line breaks inside sentences make the rendered GitHub description look broken. Only break lines at natural paragraph boundaries (blank line between sections).
Phase 5: Show Before → After, Then Apply
ALWAYS show the diff before applying. Never silently overwrite.
Current description:
──────────────────────────────────────────────
<current body, or "(empty)" if blank>
──────────────────────────────────────────────
Proposed description:
──────────────────────────────────────────────
<new body>
──────────────────────────────────────────────Use AskUserQuestion with a Yes/No question before applying:
Question: "Apply this description to PR #<NUMBER>?"
Options: Yes | NoOnly proceed if the user selects Yes. If No, ask what to change and re-draft.
Apply using the GitHub API directly:
gh api --method PATCH repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<NUMBER> \
--field body='## Motivation
...
## Technical Details
...
## Test Plan
- [ ] ...'Resolve {owner}/{repo} with:
gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q .nameWithOwnerTo also update the title, add --field title='...' to the same call.
Verify the update:
gh pr view <NUMBER>Red Flags — Stop and Correct
- About to call
gh pr create— that recreates the PR. Usegh api --method PATCH. - Using
mainas the base branch without readingbaseRefNamefrom the PR. - Overwriting the body without reading and displaying the current content first.
- Applying changes without showing before/after and using
AskUserQuestionYes/No.
Common Mistakes
| Mistake | Fix |
Using gh pr edit or gh pr create | Use gh api --method PATCH repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<NUMBER> |
Hardcoding base branch as main | Read baseRefName from gh pr view |
| Overwriting user-written motivation | Read existing body first, preserve domain context |
| Skipping confirmation | Show before/after diff, then use AskUserQuestion Yes/No |
| Generic description | Reference actual commits, files, and decisions from the diff |
| Hard-wrapping lines at 80 chars | Write prose as continuous lines; only break at paragraph boundaries |
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
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.

