pr-description

name	pr-description
description	Draft pull request descriptions from the current branch using the shared PR template and branch evidence. Use when Codex needs to prepare a PR body, summarize branch changes for reviewers, fill the checklist from actual evidence, or recommend the final commit message text.

PR Description

Use this skill when the user asks for a PR body, PR description, or a template-compliant summary of the current branch.

Quick Start

1. Resolve the base branch.
   • Prefer origin/main.
   • Fall back to origin/master if origin/main does not exist.
2. Gather evidence from the current branch.
   • commit range
   • changed files
   • relevant test commands or artifacts
   • docs or config changes
3. Fill the bundled template at templates/pr_description.md.
4. Preserve section order exactly.
5. Mark unknowns explicitly instead of guessing.
6. Return final Markdown only, with no preamble.

Workflow

1. Resolve the comparison base

• Determine whether origin/main exists locally.
• If not, use origin/master.
• Use the merge-base against the current branch so the description reflects only branch-specific work.

Example commands:

git rev-parse --verify origin/main
git rev-parse --verify origin/master
git merge-base HEAD origin/main
git merge-base HEAD origin/master

2. Gather evidence

• Inspect commit subjects in the branch range.
• Inspect the file diff against the resolved base.
• Look for tests, coverage notes, and docs updates in the branch changes.
• Do not invent build outputs, coverage numbers, or dependencies.

Helpful commands:

git log --oneline <merge-base>..HEAD
git diff --stat <merge-base>..HEAD
git diff --name-only <merge-base>..HEAD

3. Fill the template

Use the bundled template at templates/pr_description.md and preserve these sections in order:

1. Why are you doing this?
2. How are you doing?
3. What is the current behavior?
4. What is the new behavior?
5. Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
6. Does this PR depend on any other PR?
7. PR Checklist
8. Commit Message
9. Test Results & Code Coverage

4. Apply evidence rules

• For the dependency section, list concrete dependent commit hashes or PRs when they exist.
• If there is no evidence of a dependency, state none.
• For checklist values, set [Y] or [N] from branch evidence only.
• For Test Results & Code Coverage, include only validation evidence that is meaningful for the changed behavior:
  • Prefer exact command results, generated artifacts, or deterministic script output.
  • When using a ticket-based or workflow example, state the ticket id, the changed workflow exercised, the expected behavior, and the observed pass/fail or before/after result.
  • Do not include unrelated ticket metadata, labels, status, region, ownership, or companion-field details unless that exact data proves the changed PR behavior.
  • If supporting context is useful but does not prove behavior, omit it or keep it to one brief Example used: sentence outside the validation bullets.
• If coverage artifacts are missing, say so plainly in the final section.
• Keep the language concise, factual, and reviewer-friendly.

5. Validate before returning

• Confirm every template heading is present and in order.
• Confirm the commit message recommendation follows type: summary.
• Confirm every validation bullet explains which changed behavior it proves.
• Confirm testing and docs claims are supported by the diff or known artifacts.
• Remove validation details that are true but unrelated to the changed behavior before returning or updating a PR.
• Return Markdown only.

Notes

• This skill is the canonical global path for PR description generation in this starter repo.
• The template is packaged with this skill so AIPack installs can use it without relying on the repo-level templates/ directory.
• Add provider-specific PR skills separately if your team also wants comment workflows or PR publishing helpers.