update-pr
Skill385 starsChanged 55 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Update an existing pull request with new changes. Use when the user wants to update a PR, push follow-up changes to a PR, refresh a PR description, or sync a PR with latest commits. Triggers on: update pr, update-pr, update the pr, push to pr, refresh pr, sync pr, update pull request.
- Deletes or force-pushes
- Commits and pushes
13 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- frostney/pascal-mcp-sdktheir own version, first seen Oct 21, 2026
- raine/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 21, 2026
- microsoft/vscodetheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- frostney/known-good-routetheir own version, first seen Oct 11, 2026
- frostney/knipstheir own version, first seen Oct 9, 2026
- GRIDLOCK-NYC/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use native-nostalgia-stack, software-engineering-excellence and 7 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.
frostneySkillnative-nostalgia-stack
Applies the user's FreePascal toolchain and its build, formatting, hook, and test contracts while leaving project-specific mechanics local. Use when scaffolding or working in a FreePascal project that follows this toolchain.
Also in 3 projects that use this
frostneySkillsoftware-engineering-excellence
Applies the user's engineering standards during substantial technical work: preserve scope, use current evidence, delegate independent parts, and complete authorized outcomes. Use during substantial implementation, debugging, refactoring, or multi-part delivery work.
Also in 3 projects that use this
withpiperSkillroadmap-review
Audit roadmap health — issues, dependency order, spec coverage, doc freshness. Use when speccing a new initiative. Use when /phase-plan output looks suspicious. Use before /roadmap-create reruns.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Model Context ProtocolSkillproject-structure
Where things live in the Inspector repo — which client owns which surface, what is in core/ versus clients/web, and what each top-level directory is for. Use when locating code, deciding where a new module belongs, or answering which package owns or contains a given area of the codebase.
Also in 3 projects that use this
ReinaMacCredySkillcodebase-audit
Deep codebase audit that first reads project docs (AGENTS.md, README.md) and investigates the architecture, then systematically finds hardcoded constants that should be dynamic and unfinished code (TODOs, "will"/"would" in comments). Use this skill when the user wants a thorough code review for hygiene issues, asks to find hardcoded values, wants to audit for TODOs or incomplete code, says things like "audit this codebase", "find hardcoded stuff", "what's unfinished", "find tech debt", "code hygiene check", or asks you to look across the whole project for issues. Also use when the user asks to understand a project before making changes, or wants a comprehensive health check of their codebase.
Also in 3 projects that use this
sahinSkillcreate-issue
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions13 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- ReflexioAI/claude-smart★ 792100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 12
- microsoft/vscode★ 195ksame name
- remix-run/remix★ 33ksame name
- NVIDIA-NeMo/DataDesigner★ 2.4ksame name
- frostney/pascal-mcp-sdk★ 2same name
- raine/skills★ 2same name
- zkmake/skills★ 2same name
- frostney/knips★ 1same name
- mitchdowd/skills★ 1same name
- frostney/known-good-route★ 0same name
- GRIDLOCK-NYC/claude-skills★ 0same name
2 more not listed
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 repository6 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- docs/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- docs/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- create-prSkill
- connect-data-sourceSkill
- integrate-reflexioSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
16 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 8 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 12 edited versions we read keep these.
8
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
8
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 23
Ensure the feature branch is up-to-date with the base branch to avoid merge conflicts:
- Distinctive: line 30
Read the conflicting files to understand both sides
- Very specific: line 42
Run git log origin/<base-branch>..HEAD --oneline to see all commits on this branch
- Very specific: line 43
Run git diff origin/<base-branch>...HEAD --stat for a high-level summary of changed files
- Very specific: line 44
Run git diff origin/<base-branch>...HEAD to read the full diff.
- Distinctive: line 48
Important: Look at ALL commits, not just the latest one.
- Very specific: line 55
Use conventional prefix: feat:, fix:, refactor:, docs:, chore:
- Distinctive: line 81
Keep PRs focused on a single concern — suggest splitting if the PR is too large
- Distinctive: line 83
Do NOT include any "Generated with Claude Code" footer or bot attribution lines
- Very specific: line 84
Do NOT include Co-Authored-By lines
- Very specific: line 88
Write the body to a temp file and use --body-file to avoid shell argument length limits:
- Very specific: line 109
Draft/Ready handling: If the user wants to mark a draft PR as ready for review, run gh pr ready.
- Very specific: line 115
If gh pr edit fails, diagnose the error and suggest fixes
- Distinctive: line 121
PR Size: Keep PRs small and focused.
- Distinctive: line 123
Commit History: If the commit history is messy, suggest rebasing to clean it up.
- Distinctive: line 125
Feedback Requests: If the user mentions wanting specific feedback, add a "Feedback Requested" section to the body.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 12 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.
Files
PR Updater
Push follow-up changes to an existing PR and update its description to reflect the new work.
Workflow
Step 1: Pre-flight Checks
- Verify GitHub CLI authentication — run
gh api user --jq '.login'to confirm the CLI is authenticated. If this fails, the user needs to rungh auth loginfirst. - Find the existing PR — run
gh pr view --json number,title,body,url,baseRefName,stateto find the PR for the current branch. If no PR exists, abort and suggest using/create-prinstead. Check thestatefield — if it is notOPEN, abort and inform the user that the PR is already merged or closed. - Verify clean git state — run
git statusto ensure no uncommitted changes. If there are uncommitted changes, commit them directly — do NOT delegate to another skill or tell the user to commit first. - Sync submodules — check if
.gitmodulesexists first. If it does, rungit submodule update --init --recursive. If not, skip this step.
Step 2: Sync with Base Branch
Ensure the feature branch is up-to-date with the base branch to avoid merge conflicts:
- Fetch latest remote — run
git fetch origin <base-branch>(use the base branch from the PR metadata) - Check for divergence — run
git log HEAD..origin/<base-branch> --onelineto see if the base branch has new commits - Rebase if needed — if there are new commits on the base branch:
a. Run
git rebase origin/<base-branch>b. Resolve conflicts — if the rebase hits conflicts:- Read the conflicting files to understand both sides
- Surface the conflict to the user — show both sides and ask which version to keep. Do not silently resolve conflicts.
- Stage resolved files:
git add <file> - Continue:
git rebase --continue - Repeat until rebase completes
- Verify clean state — run
git statusto confirm no unresolved conflicts remain - Push the branch — run
git push. If the rebase changed history, usegit push --force-with-leaseinstead. If--force-with-leasefails, it means someone else has pushed to this branch. Fetch the remote branch (git fetch origin <branch>), inspect the divergence (git log HEAD..origin/<branch> --oneline), and ask the user how to proceed — they may need to integrate the other contributor's changes first.
Step 3: Analyze New Changes
Understand the full scope of changes now in the PR:
- Run
git log origin/<base-branch>..HEAD --onelineto see all commits on this branch - Run
git diff origin/<base-branch>...HEAD --statfor a high-level summary of changed files - Run
git diff origin/<base-branch>...HEADto read the full diff. Note: Three-dot (...) syntax is intentional — it shows only the changes introduced on this branch since it diverged from the base, excluding commits on the base branch that aren't part of this PR. - Identify the type of change:
feat,fix,refactor,docs,chore, etc. - Review existing PR title and body — compare the current PR title and body (from Step 1) against the full diff. Note what's already accurately described vs. what's missing, outdated, or no longer relevant.
Important: Look at ALL commits, not just the latest one. The updated PR description should reflect the entire branch, not just the new additions.
Step 4: Update the PR Description
Title
- Under 70 characters
- Use conventional prefix:
feat:,fix:,refactor:,docs:,chore: - Review the existing PR title (from Step 1). If it still accurately reflects the full scope of changes, keep it. If the scope has changed or the title is misleading, update it.
Body
Review the existing PR body (from Step 1) and update it to reflect the current state of the branch. Preserve any still-accurate content (e.g., context, links, decisions) rather than rewriting from scratch. Use this template — scale detail with PR complexity:
## Summary
<1-5 bullet points explaining what changed and WHY — covering ALL changes in the branch>
## Changes
<Categorized list of what was modified — group by area/concern>
## Diagrams
<OPTIONAL — include Mermaid diagrams when visual aids clarify workflow or architecture changes>
## Test Plan
<How the changes were verified — manual testing steps, automated tests run, curl commands, etc.>Guidelines for the body:
- State the purpose clearly — explain why, not just what
- Cover ALL changes in the branch, not just the latest commits
- Provide context and background with links to relevant issues/docs
- Include Mermaid diagrams when they simplify explanation of workflows or architecture
- Keep PRs focused on a single concern — suggest splitting if the PR is too large
- Before overwriting the PR body, compare the existing body against the standard template sections (Summary, Changes, Diagrams, Test Plan). Flag any sections or content that appear to have been manually added after PR creation (e.g., reviewer notes, deployment checklists, linked discussions) and ask the user whether to preserve them.
- Do NOT include any "Generated with Claude Code" footer or bot attribution lines
- Do NOT include
Co-Authored-Bylines
Step 5: Apply Updates
Write the body to a temp file and use --body-file to avoid shell argument length limits:
cat > /tmp/pr_body.md <<'EOF'
## Summary
...
## Changes
...
## Test Plan
...
EOF
gh pr edit --title "the pr title" --body-file /tmp/pr_body.mdDo NOT add:
--authorflag- Any
Co-Authored-Bytrailer - Any "Generated with Claude Code" footer
Draft/Ready handling: If the user wants to mark a draft PR as ready for review, run gh pr ready. If the user wants to convert to draft, run gh pr ready --undo.
Step 6: Report
- Return the PR URL so the user can review it
- Summarize what changed in the PR description compared to before
- If
gh pr editfails, diagnose the error and suggest fixes
Best Practices Encoded
PR Size: Keep PRs small and focused. If the diff is very large (>500 lines changed), suggest splitting into smaller PRs.
Commit History: If the commit history is messy, suggest rebasing to clean it up. Clean commits that explain why make review much easier.
Feedback Requests: If the user mentions wanting specific feedback, add a "Feedback Requested" section to the body.
Screenshots: For frontend changes, remind the user to add screenshots or recordings to the PR after updating.
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.

