finish-the-pr
Skill1 starsChanged 19 days agoMITView on GitHub
Carry finished work to a pull request that is ready to merge, then stop. "/finish-the-pr" proves the change, rebases, files the pull request, waits for checks and review bots, fixes what is real, and hands over. Never merges.
In this repository17 other files it gives its agents.
- broooooSkill
- did-we-break-itSkill
- fix-it-properlySkill
- just-tell-meSkill
- lets-build-pyramidsSkill
- next-time-fasterSkill
- no-added-commentsSkill
- onmywatchSkill
- plan-the-big-oneSkill
- sharpenSkill
- show-meSkill
- statechartSkill
- talk-is-cheapSkill
- trust-issuesSkill
- trust-me-broSkill
- walk-me-throughSkill
- you-get-meSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
14 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈12
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
- could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
- Very specific: line 17
Never merge, turn on auto-merge, join a merge queue, push to the default branch or use --admin.
- Distinctive: line 18
Never skip hooks. If a hook fails, fix the cause.
- Distinctive: line 19
Check the title, body and attachments for secrets and private details before you publish.
- Very specific: line 23
Finish the change: If you are on the default branch, make a branch first.
- Distinctive: line 26
File it: Look at recently merged pull requests and follow their title style.
- Distinctive: line 28
Handle what comes back: Only act on checks and comments newer than the last push.
- Distinctive: line 29
Check every bot finding against the source.
- Distinctive: line 32
Start every comment you post with a line that says an agent wrote it for the reader.
- Distinctive: line 33
Do not let review loops grow the pull request.
- Distinctive: line 51
Add the attribution lines your harness asks for.
- Distinctive: line 61
If nothing has changed, stay quiet.
- Distinctive: line 65
All must be true on the latest commit:
- Distinctive: line 70
No human review still asks for changes.
- Distinctive: line 86
Start with one verdict, then give the link, the last commit, the proof, what the reviews said, what you decided, and the risks left.
≈ “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
finish-the-pr
Take the work from its current state to a pull request the reader can merge. The reader may not be watching, so stay active until the handover. If you end your turn while checks are running, the work stops.
Work: $ARGUMENTS. If that is empty, the work in the conversation.
What you may and may not do
- You may commit, push this task's branch, rebase it, fix conflicts, and use
--force-with-leaseon this branch only. - Never merge, turn on auto-merge, join a merge queue, push to the default branch or use
--admin. - Never skip hooks. If a hook fails, fix the cause.
- Check the title, body and attachments for secrets and private details before you publish.
Steps
- Finish the change. If you are on the default branch, make a branch first. Apply
/fix-it-properlyto a fix. - Prove it. Get evidence you saw yourself in this session for every change: the failure before and the pass after, the checks the repo's CI runs, and for UI a look at the running app.
- Rebase onto the latest default branch. Check that nobody else has already solved this. If another pull request makes this one obsolete, stop and ask.
- File it. Look at recently merged pull requests and follow their title style. Check that a pull request for this branch does not already exist. Use the format below. Open a real pull request, not a draft, so review bots run.
- Wait with one watcher (below). Do not write your own polling loop.
- Handle what comes back. Only act on checks and comments newer than the last push.
- Check every bot finding against the source. Bots are sometimes wrong.
- Fix real bugs in the intended case. Prove each fix before you push it.
- Decline the rest with a written reason, and list them as follow-ups: unneeded tests, guards for cases that do not matter, extra compatibility.
- Start every comment you post with a line that says an agent wrote it for the reader.
- Do not let review loops grow the pull request. Prefer the fix that deletes code.
- Check the gate on the latest commit, then hand over.
Pull request format
Title: why the change matters, not what you touched. "Cut websocket frames by 70%", not "Negotiate permessage-deflate".
<The problem in plain words, from the reader's request. Then the fix in one or two sentences.>
## Proof
Before: <failing output or screenshot>
After: <passing output or screenshot>
## Risk
<What could break, and what happens if it does. Can it be undone: yes or no.>Add the attribution lines your harness asks for.
Waiting
| Host | Watch checks | Read state |
| GitHub | gh pr checks <n> --watch --required, in the background | gh pr view <n> --json state,isDraft,mergeable,mergeStateStatus,reviewDecision,headRefOid and gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<n>/comments |
| Azure DevOps | az repos pr show --id <n> when the az CLI is there | az repos pr policy list --id <n> |
| Other, or no CLI | None | Say you cannot watch it, and give the link |
If nothing has changed, stay quiet. Do not post "still waiting". After each push, start the watcher again. If the default branch moved and touches your files, rebase, push and wait for green again.
The gate
All must be true on the latest commit:
- Your proof covers every change in the diff.
- Required checks are green.
- Review bots have finished, and each finding is fixed or declined with a written reason.
- No human review still asks for changes.
- The branch is up to date with the default branch and has no conflicts.
Asking the reader
A question in a normal message can go unseen. Use the question tool, with the link, what blocks you, and the options with your recommendation first. Ask only when:
- You cannot prove the change.
- The gate cannot pass and you cannot fix that yourself.
- The next step deletes data, touches production, changes things outside the repo, closes a pull request, or force-pushes another branch.
- The goal is unclear in a way that changes the result.
Decide everything else yourself and list those decisions in the handover.
Handover
Start with one verdict, then give the link, the last commit, the proof, what the reviews said, what you decided, and the risks left. State that the pull request is still open and unmerged.
| Verdict | Means |
| Ready to merge | The gate passes. |
| Waiting for approval | Only a human approval is left. |
| Blocked | What stops it, what you tried and what you need. |
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.

