agentleFS
Sign inStart free
warpdotdevwarpdotdev/oz-for-oss/.agents/skills/review-pr-local/SKILL.md

review-pr-local

Skill313 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Repo-specific review guidance for oz-for-oss. Only the categories declared overridable by the core review-pr skill may be specialized here.

7 other projects use a version of this, 2 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use add-telemetry, promote-feature and 8 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • zerx-labSkill

    add-telemetry

    Add telemetry events to track user behavior or system events in the Warp codebase. Use when instrumenting new features, debugging issues, or measuring product metrics.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • zerx-labSkill

    promote-feature

    Promote a feature-flagged feature to Dogfood, Preview, or Stable in the Warp codebase. Use when a feature behind a FeatureFlag is ready to roll out to a broader audience, including wiring up the compile-time/runtime bridge and deferring flag cleanup safely.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • black12-agSkill

    classify-changelog-pr

    Reference guidance for classifying whether an unmarked PR should appear in the changelog and under which category. Used inline by the changelog-draft skill — not dispatched as a separate agent.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • black12-agSkill

    cross-platform-cloud-verification

    Orchestrates cost-conscious cloud verification across available operating-system and architecture runners after cheaper checks pass. Use whenever a code change, bug fix, build, packaging flow, native dependency, UI behavior, filesystem behavior, or test has material cross-platform implications, even if the user only asks to verify or test the change. Consult domain verification skills for what to test; use this skill to choose and access the smallest relevant set of platforms.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • +1 more from zerx-lab
  • +5 more from black12-ag

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. 1 is common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 1

    Common

    Most of the 7 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
  1. Common:

    Verify that terminology is consistent across related messages in the same PR.

    line 18
  2. Distinctive:

    When code renders optional dynamic data (URLs, session links, metadata), flag cases where a missing value would produce empty or broken …

    line 22
  3. Distinctive:

    Prefer starting with generic, user-safe error messages over exposing internal details.

    line 23
  4. Distinctive:

    Do not suggest removing session links, workflow URLs, or other debugging context from error paths.

    line 27

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 7 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

Repo-specific review guidance for oz-for-oss

This file is a companion to the core review-pr skill. It does not redefine the review output schema, severity labels, safety rules, or evidence rules. It only specializes the override categories the core skill marks as overridable.

User-facing strings

  • Flag interpolated text that would read unnaturally at runtime (e.g. wrong casing after a sentence fragment like "The triage concluded that {summary}").
  • Link text should be descriptive (e.g. "triage session on Warp"), not bare URLs or generic "click here" labels.
  • Verify that terminology is consistent across related messages in the same PR.

Graceful degradation

  • When code renders optional dynamic data (URLs, session links, metadata), flag cases where a missing value would produce empty or broken output. The fix is usually to omit the element entirely and show a short fallback message.
  • Prefer starting with generic, user-safe error messages over exposing internal details.

Debugging and observability

  • Do not suggest removing session links, workflow URLs, or other debugging context from error paths. These are valuable for post-incident investigation even when the operation failed.

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.

Check your setup, free