agentleFS
ScinoScino/fstack/skills/make-pr-easy-to-review/SKILL.md

make-pr-easy-to-review

Skill18 starsChanged 54 days agoMITView on GitHub

Prepare PRs for review by cleaning noisy history, improving PR descriptions, and adding reviewer guidance without changing code behavior. Use for "make this easy to review", "tidy this PR", "clean up commits", or "annotate the diff".

6 other projects use a version of this, 6 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use loop-on-ci, run-smoke-tests and 5 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.
  • cogine-aiSkill

    loop-on-ci

    Monitor PR checks and fix failures until green. Uses gh pr checks as the source of truth for PR-attached checks.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    run-smoke-tests

    Run smoke tests to verify extension functionality in a real VS Code environment. Use this when checking if basic features work after changes.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • ElyzeSolutionsSkill

    control-ui

    Build or adapt a local browser/CDP harness to drive and inspect a web, IDE, or Electron UI. Use for local UI verification, screenshots, accessibility snapshots, perf profiles, visual diffs, or reproducing UI bugs.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AWSSkill

    wizard

    Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform. Use when provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover. Don't invoke this for steps the agent can perform itself.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • Google CloudSkill

    triage

    Gather context on a change or bug and plan the implementation.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    improve-codebase-architecture

    Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

9 rules. 9 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 9

    Common

    Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Common:

    Only rewrite history when the user asks for it or agrees to the plan.

    line 21
  2. Common:

    After rewriting, verify content identity:

    line 37
  3. Common:

    Do not push if the tree changed unintentionally.

    line 45
  4. Common:

    When code behavior should stay untouched, prefer PR description and review notes:

    line 49
  5. Common:

    Add a TL;DR that matches the actual diff.

    line 51
  6. Common:

    Call out risky behavior changes, migration order, rollout plan, and test coverage.

    line 53
  7. Common:

    Never hide meaningful behavior changes inside "cleanup".

    line 58
  8. Common:

    Do not bypass hooks unless the user explicitly asks.

    line 59
  9. Common:

    If the PR is too large to make reviewable with notes, recommend splitting instead of polishing around the problem.

    line 60

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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

Make PR Easy to Review

Prepare a PR so a reviewer can quickly understand the intent, important files, and risk. The default goal is reviewability without behavior changes.

Workflow

  1. Resolve the target PR from the user-provided URL or current branch.
  2. Inspect commits, diff size, changed paths, generated files, and PR description.
  3. Identify reviewability issues: noisy commits, stale description, unrelated changes, mixed mechanical and logic changes, missing tests, or unclear reviewer entry points.
  4. Propose a plan before rewriting history or force-pushing.
  5. Apply safe improvements, then verify the tree or diff still matches the intended code.

History Cleanup

Only rewrite history when the user asks for it or agrees to the plan. Before rewriting:

gh pr view <PR> --json title,headRefName,baseRefName,state,commits
git fetch origin <headRefName> <baseRefName>
ORIGINAL_TREE=$(git rev-parse origin/<headRefName>^{tree})

Good commit groupings usually follow dependency order:

  1. Schema/storage or generated API definitions.
  2. Core logic.
  3. Wiring and integration.
  4. UI or surface behavior.
  5. Tests.

After rewriting, verify content identity:

echo "Original tree: $ORIGINAL_TREE"
echo "Current tree:  $(git rev-parse HEAD^{tree})"
git diff origin/<headRefName> --stat

Do not push if the tree changed unintentionally.

Reviewer Guidance

When code behavior should stay untouched, prefer PR description and review notes:

  • Add a TL;DR that matches the actual diff.
  • Separate core files from generated or mechanical files.
  • Call out risky behavior changes, migration order, rollout plan, and test coverage.
  • Link issue trackers, dashboards, or design docs when they explain intent.

Guardrails

  • Never hide meaningful behavior changes inside "cleanup".
  • Do not bypass hooks unless the user explicitly asks.
  • If the PR is too large to make reviewable with notes, recommend splitting instead of polishing around the problem.

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.