Menu
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.
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Baseado na classificação ocupacional SOC
Use when asked to rewrite or format text in the user's voice, "make this sound like me", "match my voice", "de-stiffen this", when text "reads too corporate / businessy / stiff", to "strip the em-dashes / agent typography", or to draft a Slack announcement, PR body, or doc in the user's voice. Also /match-voice.
Use when writing or rewriting reader-facing technical text — documentation, READMEs, runbooks, procedures, error messages, release notes, incident reports, API guides, agent/system prompts — or when asked to "de-slop", "make this readable", "simplify this doc", "write for non-native readers", "apply STE", "Simplified Technical English", or "ASD-STE100", or to prepare text for translation. Also use to CHECK such text for clarity violations. Do NOT use for chat replies, PR/review comments, or commit messages (that is terse-output), nor for marketing, brand, or personal-voice writing (that is match-voice) — this skill deletes persuasion by design.
Use when the user asks for a deep review, full review, comprehensive review, production readiness assessment, full audit, multi-domain audit, "security and reliability and code review", or "review everything". Also use when the user explicitly requests performance review alongside the comprehensive request (e.g. "include perf", "review including performance", "deep review with perf"); without that explicit phrasing, performance is excluded. Do NOT use for narrow single-domain reviews (use the matching review-* skill directly).
Review code architecture (SOLID, design patterns, package design, coupling, testability), Go best practices, and protobuf/API design using manual analysis and static analysis tools (gocyclo, staticcheck, buf). Use when the user asks for a code review, architecture review, Go review, protobuf review, SOLID review, or design pattern review.
Use when the user wants to execute an approved implementation plan and says any of "do it" (with a plan in scope), "lets do it" / "let's do it", "confirmed" (as approval to proceed on a plan), "implement the plan", "implement this", "execute the plan", "start implementing", "work through the plan", "implement the next phase", "build it out", "knock out the plan", or "/implement-plan PATH". Also use when a plan file (`./.plans/PLAN.md`, any `./.plans/*.md`, or legacy `./PLAN.md` / `./docs/plans/*.md`) is present and the user signals readiness to begin coding. Do NOT use when the user is still discussing, refining, or asking questions about the plan, nor when no plan exists — short imperatives like "do it" or "confirmed" alone are ambiguous; verify a plan is in scope before activating.
Use when the user asks to review the plan, sanity-check the plan, vet the plan, evaluate the plan, "is this plan ready", feasibility check on a plan, "review-plan PATH", or when another skill (like implement-plan) requests pre-flight plan evaluation before execution. Do NOT use when no plan file is in scope (the user is likely asking for a summary — use Read instead), nor when the user is asking about source code (use review-code), nor when the user wants documentation review (use review-documentation).
| name | rebase-pr-chain |
| description | 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. |
Rebase a chain of dependent PRs so they are all up-to-date and mergeable.
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.
For each PR in the chain (starting from the one closest to the trunk):
git fetch origin <baseRefName> <headRefName>
git checkout <headRefName>
Verify the working tree is clean.
git rebase origin/<baseRefName>
If the rebase completes cleanly, skip to step (d).
Follow the same conflict resolution strategy as fix-pr-conflict:
git diff --name-only --diff-filter=Ugit rebase --abort) and escalate to the user with a description of the conflict.git add <file> then git rebase --continueRun verification per verify-when-complete. Fix any issues from bad conflict resolution. If errors are unrelated, note them.
git push --force-with-lease
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.
Present a summary table:
| PR | Branch | Status |
|---|---|---|
| #33 | feature-a | Mergeable |
| #34 | feature-b | Mergeable |
| #35 | feature-c | Conflict (escalated) |