yeet-pr
Skill73 starsChanged 6 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Publish local Incan or Encero repository changes to GitHub using project standards. Use when the user asks to yeet, publish, commit and PR, push a branch and open a review-ready or draft PR from local changes while requiring the repo-local commit-message and PR-description conventions.
- Commits and pushes
In this repository30 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- add-learningSkill
- bump-rfcSkill
- closeoutSkill
- create-github-issueSkill
- create-planSkill
- create-pr-descriptionSkill
- fixSkill
- flag-compiler-bugSkill
- fleet-auditSkill
- hello-worldSkill
- loopSkill
- orchestrate-parallel-workSkill
- ralph-loopSkill
- review-and-fixSkill
- review-architectureSkill
- review-code-smellsSkill
- review-docs-claimsSkill
- review-incan-source-qualitySkill
- review-orchestrateSkill
- review-rfcSkill
- review-rust-proseSkill
- review-scopeSkill
- reviewSkill
- review-test-styleSkill
- start-workSkill
- testSkill
- write-commit-messageSkill
- write-rfcSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
37 rules. About 0 are common, 25 are distinctive, and 12 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈25
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
12
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 8
Use this skill to publish a local branch without bypassing project standards.
- Distinctive: line 12
Before drafting a commit or PR body, read and follow these skills from the target repository when present:
- Distinctive: line 17
If either skill is missing, stop and say which standard is unavailable instead of falling back to generic wording.
- Distinctive: line 24
If the worktree contains unrelated changes, do not stage everything.
- Distinctive: line 25
If there are existing staged changes, inspect git diff --cached --name-only and treat them as user-owned until proven in scope.
- Distinctive: line 29
If on main, master, or the remote default branch, create a feature branch before committing.
- Distinctive: line 31
If the branch is behind the base, prefer rebasing or merging before opening the PR.
- Distinctive: line 36
Use the resulting title as the commit subject.
- Distinctive: line 37
Do not invent issue IDs. If none are discoverable, stop and ask for the intended issue or confirm an issue-less commit.
- Distinctive: line 41
Use git add -A only when the whole worktree is confirmed in scope.
- Distinctive: line 42
Commit with the standards-compliant subject.
- Distinctive: line 43
Do not amend or rewrite user commits unless the user explicitly asks.
- Distinctive: line 46
If checks already ran before a rebase/merge, rerun at least focused checks after the rebase/merge.
- Very specific: line 47
Prefer the repo's documented gate when feasible.
- Very specific: line 48
If an acceptance contract was defined by start-work, create-plan, ralph-loop, an issue, or an RFC, verify and record which items were …
- Distinctive: line 49
If a check fails from sandbox or credential limitations, rerun with the required approval path or report the blocker clearly.
- Distinctive: line 54
Use the final diff against the chosen base branch and the final commit log.
- Very specific: line 59
Prefer local git for branch/commit/push operations.
- Distinctive: line 60
Prefer the GitHub app/connector for PR creation, PR metadata, comments, labels, reviewers, and other GitHub API operations.
- Very specific: line 61
Do not make gh the default PR-creation path.
- Very specific: line 62
If gh auth status fails with an invalid/missing token inside the sandbox, treat that as a tooling limitation.
- Very specific: line 63
Use gh only for local git-adjacent information that the connector cannot provide, or as a fallback after confirming gh auth status is valid …
- Distinctive: line 67
If push fails because the remote branch moved, fetch and resolve rather than force-pushing by default.
- Distinctive: line 72
Use a draft only when the work is partial or incomplete, a residual blocker needs resolution before useful review, or the user explicitly …
- Distinctive: line 73
Do not treat green CI as a prerequisite for review readiness.
- Distinctive: line 77
Prefer the GitHub app/connector for PR creation once the branch is pushed.
- Very specific: line 79
Use the remote default branch as base_branch unless the user specified another target.
- Distinctive: line 80
Use the standards-compliant PR title and body from the prior steps.
- Very specific: line 81
Create a ready-for-review PR when step 9 finds the work review-ready.
- Very specific: line 82
If the connector cannot create the PR, use gh pr create with --draft only when step 9 requires it and gh auth status is valid in the …
- Distinctive: line 86
Never publish unrelated local changes silently.
- Very specific: line 87
Never skip write-commit-message or create-pr-description because another GitHub skill has its own simpler wording.
- Distinctive: line 88
Never open a PR with a generic autogenerated body when the repo template exists.
- Distinctive: line 89
Never mark a complete, review-ready change as draft merely because CI is pending or because draft feels safer.
- Very specific: line 90
Never ask the user to run gh auth login merely because sandboxed gh cannot see a token when the GitHub connector can perform the needed …
- Distinctive: line 91
Never leave a command running after reporting completion.
- Distinctive: line 99
Commit SHA and subject
≈ “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
Yeet PR
Use this skill to publish a local branch without bypassing project standards. It wraps staging, committing, pushing, and opening a draft PR around the repository's own write-commit-message and create-pr-description skills.
Required Standards
Before drafting a commit or PR body, read and follow these skills from the target repository when present:
.agents/skills/write-commit-message/SKILL.md.agents/skills/create-pr-description/SKILL.md
If either skill is missing, stop and say which standard is unavailable instead of falling back to generic wording.
Workflow
- Confirm the target repo and scope
- Run
git status -sb. - Inspect changed filenames and enough diff to classify the work.
- If the worktree contains unrelated changes, do not stage everything. Ask which files belong in the PR.
- If there are existing staged changes, inspect
git diff --cached --name-onlyand treat them as user-owned until proven in scope.
- Run
- Establish the branch and base
- Determine the current branch with
git branch --show-current. - If on
main,master, or the remote default branch, create a feature branch before committing. - Fetch the target base branch when possible.
- If the branch is behind the base, prefer rebasing or merging before opening the PR. If conflicts occur, resolve them, rerun relevant checks, and mention the conflict resolution.
- Determine the current branch with
- Use the commit-message standard
- Follow
.agents/skills/write-commit-message/SKILL.mdexactly. - Infer issue IDs from the branch name first, then from explicit task context.
- Use the resulting title as the commit subject.
- Do not invent issue IDs. If none are discoverable, stop and ask for the intended issue or confirm an issue-less commit.
- Follow
- Stage and commit intentionally
- Stage only in-scope files, preferably by explicit path.
- Use
git add -Aonly when the whole worktree is confirmed in scope. - Commit with the standards-compliant subject.
- Do not amend or rewrite user commits unless the user explicitly asks.
- Verify after the final history shape
- If checks already ran before a rebase/merge, rerun at least focused checks after the rebase/merge.
- Prefer the repo's documented gate when feasible. For Incan, use
make pre-commitunless the user asked for a narrower publish. - If an acceptance contract was defined by
start-work,create-plan,ralph-loop, an issue, or an RFC, verify and record which items were covered, skipped as not applicable, or still residual. Do not discover a new contract at publish time; report whether the earlier contract was honored. - If a check fails from sandbox or credential limitations, rerun with the required approval path or report the blocker clearly.
- Use the PR-description standard
- Follow
.agents/skills/create-pr-description/SKILL.mdexactly. - Locate the repository PR template.
- Use the final diff against the chosen base branch and the final commit log.
- Include RFC lifecycle handling when the diff touches RFC files.
- Preserve the template checkboxes and closing issue references required by the skill.
- Follow
- Choose the GitHub path
- Prefer local
gitfor branch/commit/push operations. - Prefer the GitHub app/connector for PR creation, PR metadata, comments, labels, reviewers, and other GitHub API operations.
- Do not make
ghthe default PR-creation path. In Codex sandboxed environments, the user's GitHub token is often not exposed togh, sogh auth statuscan fail even when the GitHub connector is available and authenticated. - If
gh auth statusfails with an invalid/missing token inside the sandbox, treat that as a tooling limitation. Use the GitHub connector where possible instead of asking the user to re-authenticate. - Use
ghonly for local git-adjacent information that the connector cannot provide, or as a fallback after confirminggh auth statusis valid in the current execution context.
- Prefer local
- Push
- Push the current branch with tracking:
git push -u origin <branch>. - If push fails because the remote branch moved, fetch and resolve rather than force-pushing by default.
- Force-push only when the branch is task-owned and the user explicitly approved rewriting it.
- Push the current branch with tracking:
- Set the PR review state from the work, not a publication default
- Open the PR ready for review when the accepted scope is complete, the relevant verification has passed, and no unresolved review blockers remain. This is the default for a completed
yeet-prtask. - Use a draft only when the work is partial or incomplete, a residual blocker needs resolution before useful review, or the user explicitly asks to keep it draft.
- Do not treat green CI as a prerequisite for review readiness. CI contributes merge evidence; scope completion, targeted tests, docs, and review findings determine whether the change is useful for human review.
- State the chosen review state and the evidence for it in the final report.
- Open the PR ready for review when the accepted scope is complete, the relevant verification has passed, and no unresolved review blockers remain. This is the default for a completed
- Open the PR at the determined state
- Prefer the GitHub app/connector for PR creation once the branch is pushed.
- Derive
repository_full_namefromoriginandhead_branchfrom the current branch. - Use the remote default branch as
base_branchunless the user specified another target. - Use the standards-compliant PR title and body from the prior steps.
- Create a ready-for-review PR when step 9 finds the work review-ready. Add
--draftonly when step 9 requires it. - If the connector cannot create the PR, use
gh pr createwith--draftonly when step 9 requires it andgh auth statusis valid in the current execution context; otherwise stop and report that PR creation is blocked by CLI auth while preserving the pushed branch.
Safety Rules
- Never publish unrelated local changes silently.
- Never skip
write-commit-messageorcreate-pr-descriptionbecause another GitHub skill has its own simpler wording. - Never open a PR with a generic autogenerated body when the repo template exists.
- Never mark a complete, review-ready change as draft merely because CI is pending or because draft feels safer. Draft status must communicate incomplete or intentionally withheld work.
- Never ask the user to run
gh auth loginmerely because sandboxedghcannot see a token when the GitHub connector can perform the needed GitHub operation. - Never leave a command running after reporting completion.
- Report any dirty leftovers outside the committed PR scope.
Final Report
End with:
- Branch name
- Commit SHA and subject
- PR URL
- PR review state and its rationale
- Base branch
- Verification commands and results
- Acceptance contract coverage when one exists
- Any residual risks, dirty files, or auth/tooling fallbacks
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.

