pr-finalize | Skill Performance & Reviews | TopRankSkills

TopRank Skills

Home / Skills / tools / pr-finalize

pr-finalize

maintained by dotnet

star 23.2k account_tree 1.9k verified_user MIT License
bolt View GitHub

name: pr-finalize description: Finalizes any PR for merge by verifying title and description match actual implementation. Reviews existing description quality before suggesting changes. Use when asked to "finalize PR", "check PR description", "review commit message", before merging any PR, or when PR implementation changed during review. Do NOT use for extracting lessons (use learn-from-pr), writing tests (use write-tests), or investigating build failures (use pr-build-status).

PR Finalize

Ensures PR title and description accurately reflect the implementation for a good commit message.

Standalone skill - Can be used on any PR, not just PRs created by the pr agent.


🚨 MANDATORY: Save Summary File

This is NOT optional. Complete this step EVERY time you run this skill.

Before presenting results to the user, you MUST save the summary:

# Create directory
mkdir -p CustomAgentLogsTmp/PRState/<PRNumber>/pr-finalize

# Save summary to: CustomAgentLogsTmp/PRState/<PRNumber>/pr-finalize/pr-finalize-summary.md

The summary file must include:

  • PR number, title, author, date reviewed
  • Verdict (✅ No Changes Needed / ⚠️ Needs Updates)
  • Title assessment (current vs recommended)
  • Description quality assessment with table
  • Issues found table
  • Changed files coverage
  • Recommended description (if changes needed)
  • Action items checklist

Why this matters: Skills are complete workflows, not just reference material. Saving the summary ensures:

  1. Traceability of what was reviewed
  2. User can reference findings later
  3. Consistent output format across runs

Core Principle: Preserve Quality

Review existing description BEFORE suggesting changes. Many PR authors write excellent, detailed descriptions. Your job is to:

  1. Evaluate first - Is the existing description good? Better than a template?
  2. Preserve quality - Don't replace a thorough description with a generic template
  3. Enhance, don't replace - Add missing required elements (NOTE block, issue links) without rewriting good content
  4. Only rewrite if needed - When description is stale, inaccurate, or missing key information

Usage

# Get current state (no local checkout required)
gh pr view XXXXX --json title,body
gh pr view XXXXX --json files --jq '.files[].path'

# Review commit messages (helpful for squash/merge commit quality)
gh pr view XXXXX --json commits --jq '.commits[].messageHeadline'

# Review actual code changes
gh pr diff XXXXX

# Optional: if the PR branch is checked out locally
git diff origin/main...HEAD

Evaluation Workflow

Step 1: Review Existing Description Quality

Before suggesting changes, evaluate the current description:

Quality Indicator Look For
Structure Clear sections, headers, organized flow
Technical depth File-by-file changes, specific code references
Scanability Easy to find what changed and where
Accuracy Matches actual diff - not stale or incorrect
Completeness Platforms, breaking changes, testing info

Step 2: Compare to Template

Ask: "Is the existing description better than what my template would produce?"

  • If YES: Keep existing, only add missing required elements
  • If NO: Suggest improvements or replacement

Step 3: Produce Output

  • Recommended PR title (if change needed)
  • Assessment of existing description
  • Specific additions needed (e.g., "Add NOTE block at top")
  • Only full replacement if description is inadequate

Title Requirements

The title becomes the commit message headline. Make it searchable and informative.

Requirement Good Bad
Platform prefix (if specific) [iOS] Fix Shell back button Fix Shell back button
Describes behavior, not issue [iOS] SafeArea: Return Empty for non-ISafeAreaView views Fix #23892
Captures the "what" Return Empty for non-ISafeAreaView Fix SafeArea bug
Notes model change if applicable (opt-in model) (omitted)
No noise prefixes [iOS] Fix... [PR agent] Fix...

Title Formula

[Platform] Component: What changed (model change if any)

Examples:

  • [iOS] SafeArea: Return Empty for non-ISafeAreaView views (opt-in model)
  • [Android] CollectionView: Fix scroll position reset on item update
  • [Windows] Shell: Use NavigationView instead of custom flyout

Description Requirements

PR description should:

  1. Start with the required NOTE block (so users can test PR artifacts)
  2. Include the base sections from .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md ("Description of Change" and "Issues Fixed"). The skill adds additional structured fields (Root cause, Fix, Key insight, etc.) as recommended enhancements for better agent context.
  3. Match the actual implementation
<!-- Please let the below note in for people that find this PR -->
> [!NOTE]
> Are you waiting for the changes in this PR to be merged?
> It would be very helpful if you could [test the resulting artifacts](https://github.com/dotnet/maui/wiki/Testing-PR-Builds) from this PR and let us know in a comment if this change resolves your issue. Thank you!

### Description of Change
[Must match actual implementation]

### Issues Fixed
Fixes #XXXXX

Content for Future Agents

The title and description become the commit message. Future agents searching git history will use this to understand:

  • What changed and why
  • What patterns to follow or avoid
  • How this change affects related code

Required Elements for Agent Success

Element Purpose Example
Root cause Why the bug occurred "Non-ISafeAreaView views falling through to return baseSafeArea"
Fix approach What the code now does "Return SafeAreaPadding.Empty for views without interface"
Philosophy/model change If behavior model changed "Before: opt-out. After: opt-in via interface"
Key interfaces/types Types agents need to know "ISafeAreaView, ISafeAreaView2 = opt-in contract"
What NOT to do Failed approaches to avoid "Don't use Element type in Platform layer"
Architectural constraints Layer boundaries, type availability "Platform layer cannot reference Controls types"
Edge cases Known limitations or risks "Legacy layouts are [Obsolete], custom views need interface"

"What NOT to Do" Section (Critical)

When try-fix or debugging revealed failed approaches, document them:

### What NOT to Do (for future agents)

- ❌ **Don't use [Type] in [Layer]** - [Why it fails]
- ❌ **Don't use [Pattern]** - [Why it's brittle/wrong]
- ❌ **Don't [Approach]** - [Why it doesn't work]

This prevents future agents from repeating failed experiments.

Philosophy/Model Changes

When a fix changes the behavioral model (not just fixing a bug), call it out explicitly:

**This is a philosophy change:**
- **Before:** [Old behavior model]
- **After:** [New behavior model]

Example: "Before: Safe area applied by default (opt-out). After: Only views implementing ISafeAreaView get safe area (opt-in)."

Common Issues

Problem Cause Solution
Description doesn't match code Implementation changed during review Update description to match actual diff
Missing root cause Author focused on "what" not "why" Add root cause from issue/analysis
References wrong approach Started with A, switched to B Update to describe final approach
Missing NOTE block Author didn't use template Prepend NOTE block, keep rest
Good description replaced Agent used template blindly Evaluate existing quality first

Output Format

When Existing Description is Good

## PR #XXXXX Finalization Review

### ✅ Title: [Good / Needs Update]
**Current:** "Existing title"
**Recommended:** "[Platform] Improved title" (if needed)

### ✅ Description: Excellent - Keep As-Is

**Quality assessment:**
- Structure: ✅ Clear sections with headers
- Technical depth: ✅ File-by-file breakdown
- Accuracy: ✅ Matches implementation
- Completeness: ✅ Platforms, breaking changes noted

**Only addition needed:**
- ❌ Missing NOTE block - prepend to top

**Action:** Add NOTE block, preserve everything else.

When Description Needs Rewrite

Use structured template only when existing description is inadequate:

<!-- Please let the below note in for people that find this PR -->
> [!NOTE]
> Are you waiting for the changes in this PR to be merged?
> It would be very helpful if you could [test the resulting artifacts](https://github.com/dotnet/maui/wiki/Testing-PR-Builds) from this PR and let us know in a comment if this change resolves your issue. Thank you!

### Root Cause

[Why the bug occurred - be specific about the code path]

### Description of Change

[What the code now does]

**This is a philosophy change:** (if applicable)
- **Before:** [Old model]
- **After:** [New model]

[Cross-platform alignment notes if relevant]

### Key Technical Details

**[Relevant interfaces/types]:**
- `InterfaceA` - [What it does]
- `InterfaceB` - [What it does]

**[Category] that [work/don't work]:**
- List of types/views affected

### What NOT to Do (for future agents)

- ❌ **Don't [approach 1]** - [Why it fails]
- ❌ **Don't [approach 2]** - [Why it's wrong]
- ❌ **Don't [approach 3]** - [Constraint that prevents it]

### Edge Cases

| Scenario | Risk | Mitigation |
|----------|------|------------|
| [Case 1] | Low/Medium/High | [How to handle] |
| [Case 2] | Low/Medium/High | [How to handle] |

### Issues Fixed

Fixes #XXXXX

### Platforms Tested

- [x] iOS
- [x] Android
- [ ] Windows
- [ ] Mac

Quality Comparison Examples

Good Existing Description (KEEP)

## Changes Made

### 1. **PickerHandler.iOS.cs** - MacCatalyst-specific improvements

#### Added UIAlertController instance field
- Declared `UIAlertController? pickerController` as instance field...

#### Improved picker dismiss logic
- Moved picker dismiss logic from event handler to "Done" button action
- Removed `EditingDidEnd` event handler causing duplicate dismiss calls

## Platforms Affected
- **MacCatalyst** (primary)
- iOS (no behavior changes, shared code)

## Breaking Changes
None

Verdict: Excellent - file-by-file breakdown, specific changes, platforms, breaking changes. Keep it.

Poor Existing Description (REWRITE)

Fixed the issue mentioned in #30897

Verdict: Inadequate - no detail on what changed. Use template.

Complete Example

See references/complete-example.md for a full agent-optimized PR description showing all elements above applied to a real SafeArea fix.

chat Comments (0)

chat_bubble_outline

No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!

Skill Details

GitHub Stars 23.2k
GitHub Forks 1.9k
Created Jan 2026
Last Updated 4 months ago
tools tools git workflows

Related Skills

pr

pr

MoonshotAI
star 6.1k
chevron_right
feature-dev
chevron_right
drafting-pr
chevron_right
creating-pr
chevron_right
checking-docs
chevron_right

Build your own?

Join 12,000+ developers contributing to the Claude ecosystem.