commit-conventions
Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Conventional Commits format plus atomic-PR discipline. Keeps history readable and changelogs automatic.
7 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- aiidateam/aiida-coretheir own version, first seen Nov 2, 2026
- tovrleaf/openkatatheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- theyoungastronauts/polaristheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- getsentry/skillettheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- areal-project/AReaLtheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- inclusionAI/AReaLtheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
Other versions7 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 7
- areal-project/AReaL★ 5.9ksame name
- inclusionAI/AReaL★ 5.9ksame name
- aiidateam/aiida-core★ 608same name
- getsentry/skillet★ 13same name
- theyoungastronauts/polaris★ 4same name
- future-mine/claude-skill★ 1same name
- tovrleaf/openkata★ 1same 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 repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- accessibility-a11ySkill
- ask-first-promptsSkill
- business-stress-testSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- feynman-explainerSkill
- prompt-writes-promptSkill
- security-reviewSkill
- sparring-partnerSkill
- tdd-workflowSkill
- typescript-strictSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
Every commit and pull-request title must follow Conventional Commits.
- Distinctive: line 68
Keep PRs under 400 lines of diff where possible.
- Distinctive: line 69
Every PR description ends with a "Test plan" checklist a reviewer can run.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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
Commit Conventions
Every commit and pull-request title must follow Conventional Commits. The format is non-negotiable because release notes and version bumps are generated from it.
Format
<type>(<optional scope>): <subject>
<optional body — wrapped at 72 columns>
<optional footer — issue refs, breaking change notices>Types
| Type | When to use it |
feat | New user-facing capability |
fix | Bug fix |
perf | Code change that improves performance |
refactor | Restructure without changing behaviour |
docs | Documentation only |
test | Adding or correcting tests |
build | Build system, dependencies, packaging |
ci | CI configuration |
chore | Maintenance with no source impact (e.g. version bumps) |
revert | Revert of a previous commit (include the reverted SHA in the body) |
Subject line
- Imperative mood:
addnotaddedoradds. - Lowercase, no trailing period.
- ≤72 characters total including type and scope.
- Describe what the commit changes, not how.
Good: feat(auth): add WebAuthn fallback for legacy browsers
Bad: Updated some files for auth
Body
- Optional, but expected for any non-trivial change.
- Explain why, not what — the diff already shows what.
- Reference the design doc, ticket, or incident that motivated the change.
- Wrap lines at 72 columns.
Footer
BREAKING CHANGE:on its own line, followed by a description and the migration path.Refs:for issue numbers (Refs: #123, #456).Co-authored-by:for pair-programming credit.
Atomic PR rules
- One PR = one reviewable concern. Mixing a refactor with a bug fix doubles review time.
- A PR's title must match the merge commit's title (use squash merge with conventional title).
- Keep PRs under 400 lines of diff where possible. If you need more, split.
- Every PR description ends with a "Test plan" checklist a reviewer can run.
Common mistakes to flag
- Mixing
refactorandfeatin one commit. Split it. - Using
choreto disguise a behaviour change. Use the right type. - Stacked WIP commits inside a PR. Squash before merge or use fixup commits.
- Force-pushing over a reviewer's pending feedback. Add a new commit instead.
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.