agentleFS
paultyngpaultyng/skill-issue/skills/rebase-pr-chain/SKILL.md

rebase-pr-chain

Skill8 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Rebase a chain of dependent pull requests sequentially, fixing conflicts along the way. Use when the user asks to rebase a PR chain, fix conflicts on multiple chained PRs, or mentions sequential/stacked PRs that need updating.

  • Deletes or force-pushes
  • Commits and pushes

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈7

    Distinctive · estimate

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    If the user provides explicit PR numbers (e.g.

    line 20
  2. Distinctive:

    Verify the working tree is clean.

    line 33
  3. Distinctive:

    If the rebase completes cleanly, skip to step (d).

    line 41
  4. Distinctive:

    Follow the same conflict resolution strategy as fix-pr-conflict:

    line 45
  5. Very specific:

    After resolving: git add <file> then git rebase --continue

    line 52
  6. Distinctive:

    Run verification per verify-when-complete.

    line 57
  7. Distinctive:

    After all PRs are rebased, verify each is mergeable:

    line 67
  8. Distinctive:

    If GitHub still reports conflicts (recomputation delay), wait a few seconds and re-check once.

    line 73

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Rebase PR Chain

Rebase a chain of dependent PRs so they are all up-to-date and mergeable.

1. Identify the Chain

Accept PR numbers from the user, or detect the chain automatically:

gh pr list --state open --json number,baseRefName,headRefName

Build the dependency graph: each PR's baseRefName points to the branch of the PR it depends on. Sort topologically (base branch first).

If the user provides explicit PR numbers (e.g. "33, 34, 35, 36, 37"), use that order directly.

2. Rebase Each PR

For each PR in the chain (starting from the one closest to the trunk):

a. Fetch and checkout

git fetch origin <baseRefName> <headRefName>
git checkout <headRefName>

Verify the working tree is clean.

b. Rebase

git rebase origin/<baseRefName>

If the rebase completes cleanly, skip to step (d).

c. Resolve Conflicts

Follow the same conflict resolution strategy as fix-pr-conflict:

  1. List conflicting files: git diff --name-only --diff-filter=U
  2. For each file, understand both sides and classify:
    • Mechanical: independent changes to nearby lines. Keep both.
    • Semantic: incompatible changes to the same logic. Resolve if the outcome is clear.
    • Ambiguous: design decisions or unclear intent. Abort the rebase (git rebase --abort) and escalate to the user with a description of the conflict.
  3. After resolving: git add <file> then git rebase --continue
  4. Repeat until the rebase completes or escalation is needed.

d. Verify

Run verification per verify-when-complete. Fix any issues from bad conflict resolution. If errors are unrelated, note them.

e. Force push

git push --force-with-lease

3. Verify Chain Mergeability

After all PRs are rebased, verify each is mergeable:

gh pr view <number> --json mergeable,mergeStateStatus

If GitHub still reports conflicts (recomputation delay), wait a few seconds and re-check once.

4. Report

Present a summary table:

PRBranchStatus
#33feature-aMergeable
#34feature-bMergeable
#35feature-cConflict (escalated)

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.