commit-pr
Skill517 starsChanged 3 days agoMITView on GitHub
Mandatory Codex/Copilot publication adapter for opencode-swarm. Use for every GitHub issue assignment that results in code changes, commits, pushes, draft PRs, PR body edits, PR readying, release notes, or CI closeout. Must be loaded before `git push`, `gh pr create`, `gh pr edit`, or `gh pr ready`. Routes to the single canonical source of truth at `.claude/skills/commit-pr/SKILL.md`.
- Commits and pushes
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
31 rules. 0 are common, 18 are distinctive, and 13 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
18
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
13
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
- Very specific: line 15
Use this skill for Codex-side publication work in opencode-swarm.
- Very specific: line 19
Read and follow ../../../.claude/skills/commit-pr/SKILL.md in full before committing, pushing, opening, or updating a PR.
- Very specific: line 32
Use the available shell execution tool for git, gh, build, test, and CI commands.
- Very specific: line 33
Use apply_patch for manual file edits.
- Distinctive: line 34
Use the runtime's parallel-execution capability for independent reads, status checks, and non-conflicting repo inspections.
- Very specific: line 35
Do not stage .Codex/, IDE-local files, or unrelated worktree changes.
- Distinctive: line 36
Do not open a second PR when one already exists for the branch.
- Distinctive: line 50
If the branch already has a PR:
- Distinctive: line 55
update the existing PR body instead of creating a new PR
- Distinctive: line 57
verify the PR still points at the pushed branch head after any force-push
- Very specific: line 58
use $swarm-pr-feedback when feedback needs fixes before closeout
- Distinctive: line 67
If the user explicitly asks for a ready PR sooner, obey that request and document any remaining CI state clearly.
- Distinctive: line 71
When the user asks to open, ship, ready, or close out a PR:
- Very specific: line 74
verify check data belongs to the current headRefOid after every follow-up push
- Very specific: line 75
if a required job is cancelled and downstream jobs are skipped, inspect the run and rerun failed/cancelled jobs
- Distinctive: line 76
if an obsolete older-head run is already failed or still consuming concurrency, inspect it before cancellation and cancel only when it is …
- Distinctive: line 77
wait for required checks to finish when practical
- Very specific: line 78
after conflict resolution, verify GitHub reports both mergeable: MERGEABLE and mergeStateStatus: CLEAN.
- Very specific: line 79
when gh pr checks looks stale, inspect the workflow run directly with gh run view <run-id> --json headSha,status,conclusion,jobs,url, and …
- Distinctive: line 80
if you edit the PR body after checks are green, expect PR Standards/title checks to rerun and re-check before calling the PR green
- Very specific: line 81
do not call the PR merge-ready while a required check is cancelled, skipped, in_progress, or otherwise non-green unless the user explicitly …
- Very specific: line 94
After a forced install on Windows, EPERM while reading refreshed node_modules is usually host friction.
- Distinctive: line 100
If the PR closes an issue:
- Distinctive: line 103
if the PR merged before the comment was posted, add the missing issue comment immediately
- Very specific: line 107
Read AGENTS.md, docs/engineering-invariants.md as needed, and the canonical Claude commit-pr skill.
- Distinctive: line 108
Run the required local validation from the canonical skill.
- Distinctive: line 110
Create or update the PR.
- Distinctive: line 113
Verify issue comments, ready/draft state, and merge-readiness claims before finishing.
- Distinctive: line 117
When local validation is noisy or host-limited:
- Distinctive: line 120
document proven pre-existing failures in the PR body
- Distinctive: line 121
use remote CI as the cross-platform source of truth for merge-readiness
“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.
Files
Commit & PR
Use this skill for Codex-side publication work in opencode-swarm.
Source Of Truth
Read and follow ../../../.claude/skills/commit-pr/SKILL.md in full before committing, pushing, opening, or updating a PR.
That Claude skill remains the repository's canonical publish protocol. This Codex-native skill is the adapter layer: it tells Codex which tools to use, how to handle existing PRs, and how to finish the post-open lifecycle without drifting from the repo contract.
If instructions conflict:
AGENTS.mddocs/engineering-invariants.md../../../.claude/skills/commit-pr/SKILL.md- this file
Codex Execution Rules
- Use the available shell execution tool for
git,gh, build, test, and CI commands. - Use
apply_patchfor manual file edits. - Use the runtime's parallel-execution capability for independent reads, status checks, and non-conflicting repo inspections.
- Do not stage
.Codex/, IDE-local files, or unrelated worktree changes. - Do not open a second PR when one already exists for the branch. Update the existing PR instead.
Publish Modes
Infer the mode from the user request and branch state:
new-pr: branch is ready to publish and no PR exists yetpr-followup: a PR already exists and you are addressing review feedback or syncing validationcloseout: a PR already exists and you are updating body text, waiting on CI, marking ready, or confirming merge prerequisites
Required Follow-Through
Existing PR updates
If the branch already has a PR:
- inspect unresolved PR feedback surfaces before updating or readying the PR: review threads/comments, requested-changes reviews, CI/check failures, mergeability/conflicts, and whether check data belongs to the current head SHA
- update the existing PR body instead of creating a new PR
- refresh
## Summary,## Invariant audit, and## Test planwhen validation counts, caveats, or evidence changed - verify the PR still points at the pushed branch head after any force-push
- use
$swarm-pr-feedbackwhen feedback needs fixes before closeout
Draft vs ready
Default behavior:
- open or keep the PR as draft while follow-up edits are still expected, required checks are pending, or known caveats still need explanation
- mark the PR ready only after the body is current and required remote checks are green
If the user explicitly asks for a ready PR sooner, obey that request and document any remaining CI state clearly.
Remote checks are authoritative
When the user asks to open, ship, ready, or close out a PR:
- inspect remote checks with
gh pr view <n> --json statusCheckRollup,...orgh pr checks <n> - verify check data belongs to the current
headRefOidafter every follow-up push - if a required job is
cancelledand downstream jobs areskipped, inspect the run and rerun failed/cancelled jobs - if an obsolete older-head run is already failed or still consuming concurrency, inspect it before cancellation and cancel only when it is no longer the PR head under validation
- wait for required checks to finish when practical
- after conflict resolution, verify GitHub reports both
mergeable: MERGEABLEandmergeStateStatus: CLEAN; local conflict-marker cleanup is not enough, and branch drift must appear in the closure ledger when it affected the PR - when
gh pr checkslooks stale, inspect the workflow run directly withgh run view <run-id> --json headSha,status,conclusion,jobs,url, and keep watching downstream integration/smoke jobs after unit jobs pass - if you edit the PR body after checks are green, expect PR Standards/title checks to rerun and re-check before calling the PR green
- do not call the PR merge-ready while a required check is
cancelled,skipped,in_progress, or otherwise non-green unless the user explicitly accepts that state
Recommended commands:
gh pr view <number> --json body,headRefName,headRefOid,isDraft,mergeable,mergeStateStatus,state,statusCheckRollup,url
gh pr checks <number> --watch --fail-fast
gh run view <run-id> --json headSha,status,conclusion,jobs,url
gh run rerun <run-id> --faileddist/ is generated output and is not committed (#1047); do not stage it and there is no dist-check drift gate. If package-check fails, inspect the CI log: it is a source / build / package.json#files problem (an incomplete or unbuildable tarball), not generated-file drift. Fix the source or manifest and rerun bun run package:smoke locally.
After a forced install on Windows, EPERM while reading refreshed node_modules
is usually host friction; rerun the exact focused command with approved access
before treating it as a code failure.
Issue comment requirement
If the PR closes an issue:
- confirm the issue comment exists with the PR link, what changed, how to use it, and migration notes
- if the PR merged before the comment was posted, add the missing issue comment immediately
Working Pattern
- Read
AGENTS.md,docs/engineering-invariants.mdas needed, and the canonical Claudecommit-prskill. - Run the required local validation from the canonical skill.
- Stage only intended files.
- Create or update the PR.
- Refresh PR body text if the branch changed after review feedback.
- Watch remote checks to a useful conclusion when the user asked for publication or closeout.
- Verify issue comments, ready/draft state, and merge-readiness claims before finishing.
Clean-Main And CI Reality Checks
When local validation is noisy or host-limited:
- compare suspicious failures against a clean
origin/mainworktree before blaming the branch - document proven pre-existing failures in the PR body
- use remote CI as the cross-platform source of truth for merge-readiness
Final Sanity Check
- one branch, one PR
- PR head matches pushed
HEAD - PR body matches current validation evidence
- issue comment exists when the PR closes an issue
- draft or ready state matches user intent
- required remote checks are green, or any remaining non-green state is explicitly explained
Other versions7 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- zaxbysauce/opencode-swarm★ 517100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 6
- videojs/video.js★ 40ksame name
- samuelclay/NewsBlur★ 7.7ksame name
- fboulnois/skills★ 1same name
- parthsidpara/lazyskills★ 1same name
- pujakesuma/my-claude-skills★ 1same name
- tiantaiyang/claude-skills★ 0same 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 repository66 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- ci-fix-monitorSkill
- codebase-review-swarmSkill
- contributingSkill
- engineering-conventionsSkill
- fork-pr-operationsSkill
- guardrail-patternsSkill
- issue-tracerSkill
- mock-to-internals-migrationSkill
- pr-review-fixSkill
- qa-sweepSkill
- research-firstSkill
- running-testsSkill
- subprocess-safetySkill
- swarm-ci-monitorSkill
- swarm-implementSkill
- swarm-pr-feedbackSkill
- swarm-pr-reviewSkill
- swarm-pr-subscribeSkill
- swarmSkill
- tech-debt-ci-reviewSkill
- test-file-splitSkill
- unswarmSkill
- writing-testsSkill
- brainstormSkill
- clarifySkill
- clarify-specSkill
- codebase-review-swarmSkill
- commit-prSkill
- consultSkill
- councilSkill
- critic-gateSkill
- deep-diveSkill
- deep-researchSkill
- design-docsSkill
- discoverSkill
- durable-session-stateSkill
- editing-skillsSkill
- engineering-conventionsSkill
- executeSkill
- fork-pr-operationsSkill
- graphifySkill
- issue-ingestSkill
- issue-tracerSkill
- orchestrating-subagentsSkill
- phase-wrapSkill
- pre-phase-briefingSkill
- qa-sweepSkill
- research-firstSkill
- rust-crate-ciSkill
- specifySkill
- swarm-ci-monitorSkill
- swarm-implementSkill
- swarm-planSkill
- swarm-pr-feedbackSkill
- swarm-pr-reviewSkill
- swarm-pr-subscribeSkill
- swarm-resumeSkill
- The first 60 shown.
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.

