agentleFS
shaunandrewsshaunandrews/agent-skills/skills/pr-review-guide/SKILL.md

pr-review-guide

Skill8 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Draft, update, or restructure GitHub pull request descriptions into reviewer-friendly guides for large, AI-assisted, proof-of-concept, or hard-to-review PRs. Use when the user asks to update a PR body, preserve screenshots or existing sections, explain what reviewers should focus on, categorize a large diff, document architecture decisions, add safety/testing evidence, or turn "please read this giant diff" into a practical review map.

4 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

14 rules. 0 are common, 13 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 13

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Read the current PR body before writing anything.

    line 14
  2. Distinctive:

    Keep the pointer outside the captured surface or use a cursor-free capture.

    line 18
  3. Distinctive:

    Use comparable framing for before/after images and confirm they visibly prove the reported problem and fix.

    line 21
  4. Very specific:

    If updating GitHub, write the new body to a temp file and use gh pr edit --body-file.

    line 29
  5. Distinctive:

    Use this structure as the default for large PRs:

    line 34
  6. Distinctive:

    Write for reviewers who cannot spend a week reading the diff.

    line 66
  7. Distinctive:

    Call out what to skim, what to ignore, and what needs careful review.

    line 69
  8. Distinctive:

    Keep implementation file lists short and purposeful.

    line 70
  9. Distinctive:

    Prefer "what changed and why" over "how the code is written."

    line 71
  10. Distinctive:

    Do not remove screenshots, videos, or demo links unless the user explicitly asks.

    line 73
  11. Distinctive:

    Default UI / existing user flow impact

    line 83
  12. Distinctive:

    Follow-up issues for non-blocking gaps

    line 87
  13. Distinctive:

    Use a body file to avoid shell quoting problems:

    line 91
  14. Distinctive:

    After updating, tell the user exactly what changed and whether protected sections were preserved.

    line 100

“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

PR Review Guide

Purpose

Turn a large or hard-to-review PR into a useful human review artifact. Treat the PR description as the primary guide for reviewer judgment, not as a file-by-file diff summary.

Workflow

  1. Read the current PR body before writing anything.
  2. Identify sections that must be preserved, especially screenshots, videos, image links, demo GIFs, and explicit reviewer notes.
  3. Validate every new screenshot before uploading it:
    • Reset browser zoom to 100%.
    • Keep the pointer outside the captured surface or use a cursor-free capture.
    • Capture the full relevant UI without accidental cropping.
    • Inspect the saved file at actual size.
    • Use comparable framing for before/after images and confirm they visibly prove the reported problem and fix.
  4. Inspect the PR enough to understand the conceptual shape of the change:
    • gh pr view
    • gh pr diff --name-only
    • local git diff or git log when the branch is checked out
    • key files only; do not pretend to review every line if the request is description-focused
  5. Replace disposable boilerplate with a concise review guide.
  6. Preserve protected sections exactly unless the user asks to edit them.
  7. If updating GitHub, write the new body to a temp file and use gh pr edit --body-file.
  8. Re-read the PR body after editing and confirm preserved sections survived and all media renders.

Recommended Structure

Use this structure as the default for large PRs:

## Related issues

## How AI was used in this PR

## Executive summary

## Proposed changes

## Review guide

## Okay to skim

## Diff breakdown

## Screenshots

## Known tradeoffs and follow-ups

## Safety checklist

## Testing instructions

## Pre-merge checklist

Adapt the headings to the repository's PR template. Preserve required template headings when the repo has them.

Writing Rules

  • Write for reviewers who cannot spend a week reading the diff.
  • Make reviewer asks concrete: ask reviewers to validate decisions, architecture, API compatibility, migrations, safety, UX, and rollback strategy.
  • Separate human-judgment areas from mechanical or generated changes.
  • Call out what to skim, what to ignore, and what needs careful review.
  • Keep implementation file lists short and purposeful; the diff already shows every file.
  • Prefer "what changed and why" over "how the code is written."
  • Be explicit about known risks, user-facing behavior changes, follow-up issues, and testing evidence.
  • Do not remove screenshots, videos, or demo links unless the user explicitly asks.

Safety Checklist Items

Include relevant checked or unchecked items for:

  • Feature flags or gating
  • Rollback plan
  • Data migrations or persistence changes
  • API compatibility
  • Default UI / existing user flow impact
  • Performance
  • Security and privacy
  • Tests or manual verification
  • Follow-up issues for non-blocking gaps

GitHub Editing Pattern

Use a body file to avoid shell quoting problems:

gh pr view <number> --repo <owner/repo> --json body
# create /tmp/pr-body.md with the revised body
gh pr edit <number> --repo <owner/repo> --body-file /tmp/pr-body.md
gh pr view <number> --repo <owner/repo> --json body

After updating, tell the user exactly what changed and whether protected sections were preserved.

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.