pr-description-writer
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Drafts a PR title and description from the current branch's commits and diff, matching the repo's existing PR style. Use when the user asks to 'write a PR description', 'draft the PR', 'summarize this branch for a PR', or invokes /pr-description. Produces a title, summary, and test plan for the user to paste into their own PR — never opens or submits anything.
- Commits and pushes
6 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- jaskirat1616/grok-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Lethe044/agentskill-kittheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Infomaniak/desktop-kDrivetheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- poorvith-mp/skills-developertheir own version, first seen Aug 19, 2026
- ATOM00blue/agent-skills-protheir own version, first seen May 22, 2026
- kakarot-oncloud/claude-dev-skillstheir own version, first seen Apr 19, 2026
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 6
- Infomaniak/desktop-kDrive★ 121same name
- Lethe044/agentskill-kit★ 48same name
- jaskirat1616/grok-skills★ 22same name
- ATOM00blue/agent-skills-pro★ 0same name
- kakarot-oncloud/claude-dev-skills★ 0same name
- poorvith-mp/skills-developer★ 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 repository2 other files it gives its agents.
- commit-message-writerSkill
- dotnet-researchSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 17
Read the full diff for substance, not just the stat — understand what changed and why, not just which files were touched.
- Very specific: line 18
If gh is available and the repo has a GitHub remote, check for a PR template (.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md) and look at a couple of …
- Distinctive: line 23
If the repo has a PR template, fill its sections.
- Distinctive: line 37
Don't fabricate a linked issue number — only reference one if it's clearly present in commit messages or the branch name.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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
Purpose
Draft a PR title and description grounded in what actually changed on the branch, so opening a PR doesn't mean writing the summary from scratch.
Trigger
/pr-description, or phrasing like "write a PR description", "draft the PR for this branch", "summarize this branch for a PR". If the user doesn't specify a base branch, use the current branch's upstream tracking branch, falling back to main/master.
Gather
- Identify the base branch and inspect what's actually on the current branch:
git log <base>..HEAD --onelineandgit diff <base>...HEAD --stat. - Read the full diff for substance, not just the stat — understand what changed and why, not just which files were touched.
- If
ghis available and the repo has a GitHub remote, check for a PR template (.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md) and look at a couple of recently merged PRs (gh pr list --state merged --limit 5) to match the repo's house style — section headers, checklists, tone. - Note any issue references already present in commit messages or the branch name (e.g.
fix/123-thing, "Fixes #123"). Never invent one that isn't clearly there.
Write
If the repo has a PR template, fill its sections. Otherwise default to:
- Title — imperative mood ("Add X", "Fix Y"), under ~70 characters, matching the repo's convention (e.g. a
feat:/fix:prefix if that's the established pattern). - Summary — 1-4 bullets on what changed and why, drawn from the diff itself, not a restatement of file names.
- Test plan — a short checklist of how to verify the change: manual steps, tests run, edge cases covered. Call out specific new/changed tests if the diff includes them.
Voice
Written the way the actual author would explain their own change to a reviewer — plain and specific. No "This PR does the following:" framing, no restating the diff stat, no marketing language.
Ground rules
- Drafts text only — never runs
gh pr create, pushes, or opens anything. The user pastes the draft into their own PR. - Describes what's committed on the branch, not uncommitted working-tree state. Flag it if there are uncommitted changes that look relevant.
- Don't fabricate a linked issue number — only reference one if it's clearly present in commit messages or the branch name.
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.