Skip to content

docs: codify PM-level, short PR descriptions in the org PR template#81

Merged
devantler merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/pr-template-pm-level
Jul 3, 2026
Merged

docs: codify PM-level, short PR descriptions in the org PR template#81
devantler merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/pr-template-pm-level

Conversation

@devantler

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🤖 Generated by the Daily AI Assistant

Why

You want PR descriptions readable at PM level — short, why/what only, no code detail. The org template is where that expectation should be defined once for every repo and contributor, instead of living only in my instructions.

What

Replaces the org-wide PR template with one that asks for exactly that: a short Why, a short What, the issue link, and optional one-line flags (merge order, breaking change, new dependency, action needed). Drops the type-of-change checkboxes — the PR title already carries the type.

Part of the same policy as devantler-tech/monorepo#2042.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Review Change Stack

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The PR replaces the GitHub pull request template with a shorter, more structured format. It introduces HTML comment instructions, "Why" and "What" sections, a "Fixes #" placeholder, and optional single-line metadata fields, removing the previous checkbox-based "Type of change" section.

Changes

PR Template Update

Layer / File(s) Summary
Rewrite PR template structure
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
Replaces verbose narrative and checkbox sections with a compact template featuring "Why"/"What" prompts, a "Fixes #" placeholder, and optional metadata fields.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Poem

A rabbit hops through templates new,
Trimming words, keeping just a few.
"Why" and "What" now lead the way,
Checkboxes gone, cleared away.
A tidy PR, short and bright—
Hooray, less clutter, pure delight! 🐇

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5
✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately summarizes the template change and its intent to enforce short, PM-level PR descriptions.
Description check ✅ Passed The description is clearly related to the template update and explains the Why and What of the change.
✨ Finishing Touches
📝 Generate docstrings
  • Create stacked PR
  • Commit on current branch
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch claude/pr-template-pm-level

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@coderabbitai coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md (1)

17-17: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | ⚡ Quick win

Make the issue placeholder explicit.

Fixes # is easy to leave unchanged, which would ship an incomplete issue reference and miss the repo’s Fixes #N convention. As per the repo contributor guidance, implementing PRs use `Fixes `#N.

Suggested wording
-Fixes #
+Fixes #<issue-number>
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

In @.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md at line 17, Update the PR template
placeholder in PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE so it clearly prompts contributors to
provide an actual issue number instead of leaving “Fixes #” unchanged. Replace
the ambiguous placeholder with wording that enforces the repo’s “Fixes `#N`”
convention, keeping the change in the template text itself so it guides users
when filling out pull requests.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Nitpick comments:
In @.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md:
- Line 17: Update the PR template placeholder in PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE so it
clearly prompts contributors to provide an actual issue number instead of
leaving “Fixes #” unchanged. Replace the ambiguous placeholder with wording that
enforces the repo’s “Fixes `#N`” convention, keeping the change in the template
text itself so it guides users when filling out pull requests.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 4a9acf34-3ac7-41b7-9a48-3e3921c2a5ef

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c8d803e and d91757e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
📜 Review details
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout. (1)
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (actions)

@devantler devantler marked this pull request as ready for review July 3, 2026 03:28
@devantler devantler merged commit 96d5da5 into main Jul 3, 2026
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant