agentleFS
rlajousrlajous/claude-code-commands/skills/review-request/SKILL.md

review-request

Skill30 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Draft a short, paste-ready message asking teammates to review a pull request. Pulls the PR title, link, size, and CI status via the gh CLI, and reviewers from project config. Use when the user asks to "request review", "ask for a review", "ping for review", "post the PR", "announce the PR", or wants a one-liner to share a PR for review.

4 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    If $ARGUMENTS contains a PR number or GitHub URL, use it.

    line 17
  2. Very specific:

    If no PR exists for the current branch, stop and tell the user to create one first (e.g.

    line 24
  3. Distinctive:

    If no reviewers are configured, do not invent any.

    line 33
  4. Very specific:

    Draft: if isDraft, note it's a draft (or suggest marking ready first).

    line 43
  5. Distinctive:

    Write a short, direct message.

    line 50
  6. Distinctive:

    Keep it to 2–4 lines. No filler, no emoji unless the project's own conventions use them.

    line 56

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 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.

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

Cross-runtime: follow runtime compatibility for invocation, delegation, configuration precedence, state paths, and permissions.

You are drafting a concise, professional message that asks teammates to review a pull request. Your task is to gather PR facts via the gh CLI, pull default reviewers from project config, and produce a paste-ready message (for Slack, a PR comment, or chat). Follow each step in order. Requires GitHub CLI (gh) authenticated.

Step 1: Resolve the Pull Request

Determine which PR to announce:

  • If $ARGUMENTS contains a PR number or GitHub URL, use it.
  • Otherwise, resolve the PR for the current branch:
gh pr view --json number,title,url,additions,deletions,changedFiles,isDraft,reviewDecision,statusCheckRollup,baseRefName,headRefName,body

If no PR exists for the current branch, stop and tell the user to create one first (e.g. with /finish).

Step 2: Load Configuration

Resolve .git-workflow/config.yaml first, then .claude/config.yaml as a legacy read-only fallback. Use defaults only when neither file exists.

  • pullRequests.reviewers → default reviewers (GitHub usernames or org/team slugs). Use these as the people/teams to @-mention.
  • pullRequests.labels → for context only.

If no reviewers are configured, do not invent any. Either omit the mention or ask the user who should review (only if it adds value). Never hardcode a specific person or team.

Step 3: Gather PR Facts

From the gh data:

  • Title and URL.
  • Size: +{additions} / -{deletions} across {changedFiles} files. Classify roughly: XS (<10 lines), S (<50), M (<200), L (<500), XL (500+). This helps reviewers budget time.
  • CI status: summarize statusCheckRollup as passing / failing / pending.
  • Review state: reviewDecision (REVIEW_REQUIRED, APPROVED, CHANGES_REQUESTED).
  • Draft: if isDraft, note it's a draft (or suggest marking ready first).
  • Base ← head branches.

Optionally distill a one-line summary of what the PR does from its title and body (first meaningful line). Keep it factual — do not overstate.

Step 4: Compose the Message

Write a short, direct message. Guidelines:

  • Lead with the ask and the link.
  • Include the one-line purpose and the size so reviewers know the scope.
  • Mention CI status only if it's failing or pending (so nobody reviews a red PR by surprise).
  • @-mention the configured reviewers/teams once, if any.
  • Keep it to 2–4 lines. No filler, no emoji unless the project's own conventions use them.

Default template:

Review please: {one-line purpose} — {url}
Size: {size} ({+adds}/{-dels}, {files} files){, CI: {status} if not passing}
{@reviewer1 @org/team if configured}

Adapt tone to the destination if the user specifies one (Slack vs. formal PR comment). Do not impose any particular personal writing style.

Step 5: Present

Print the message as a single copy-pasteable block. If the PR is a draft, has failing CI, or is already approved, add a one-line heads-up before the message so the user can decide whether to send it now.

Configuration Reference

SettingDefaultDescription
pullRequests.reviewers[]GitHub usernames / org/team slugs to @-mention

Error Handling

ScenarioAction
gh not installed or not authenticatedStop with a short setup hint (gh auth login)
No PR for the current branchAsk the user to create one first (e.g. /finish)
No reviewers configuredProduce the message without a mention; optionally note it
CI status unavailableOmit the CI line rather than guessing

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.