Create high-quality pull requests with pre-submission validation, maintainer-friendly formatting, and automated quality checks.
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add clawic/skills --skill pull-request --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Pull Request?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/clawic-pull-request)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: Pull Request
slug: pull-request
version: 1.0.1
description: Create high-quality pull requests with pre-submission validation, maintainer-friendly formatting, and automated quality checks.
homepage: https://clawic.com/skills/pull-request
metadata:
clawdbot:
emoji: 🔀
displayName: Pull Request
---
## When to Use
Before creating or suggesting a pull request to ANY repository. Acts as a quality filter to prevent wasting maintainer time and embarrassing the contributor.
## Quick Reference
| Domain | File |
|--------|------|
| Pre-submission checklist | `checklist.md` |
| Red flags to avoid | `red-flags.md` |
| Repository context gathering | `repo-context.md` |
| PR description templates | `templates.md` |
## Critical Rules
- **Read CONTRIBUTING.md first** — Adapt to project's workflow, not a fixed pattern
- **Issue policy depends on scope** — Small fixes may PR directly; features need discussion first
- **Disclose AI involvement** — Mark AI-assisted PRs in title/description
- **Run checks if possible** — If you can't run tests, say so explicitly
- **Match existing style** — Check for `.editorconfig`, `prettier`, `eslint` configs
- **Small and focused** — One logical change per PR
- **No secrets ever** — Use `<PLACEHOLDER>` syntax
## Issue Policy (Contextual)
**NOT all projects require issues first.** Check CONTRIBUTING.md, then:
| Change Type | Default Action |
|-------------|----------------|
| Typo, small bug fix | PR directly (unless CONTRIBUTING.md says otherwise) |
| New feature | Open Discussion/Issue first, wait for approval |
| Architecture change | RFC or Discussion required |
| When in doubt | Ask in issue before coding |
## AI-Assisted PRs
If this PR was created with AI assistance:
1. **Mark it** — Add `[AI-assisted]` to PR title or note in description
2. **Testing level** — State: `untested` / `lightly tested` / `fully tested`
3. **Include context** — Prompts or session logs if available and helpful
4. **Confirm understanding** — "I have reviewed this code and understand what it does"
5. **Human accountable** — Link to the human directing the contribution
## Rate Limiting (Avoid Spam)
- MAX 1 open PR per repo at a time
- Wait 24h between PRs to same repo
- If 2 PRs rejected consecutively → STOP and escalate to human
- Check repo's PR velocity first (don't flood low-activity projects)
## Abandonment Prevention
- MUST respond to review feedback within 48h
- If unable to address feedback, close with: "I cannot continue; @human please take over or close"
- Never leave PRs to rot
## Scope Boundaries — STOP and Discuss First If:
- Change touches >5 files OR >200 lines
- Change modifies public API
- Change involves security, auth, or crypto
- Change is in governance, licensing, or CoC
- Maintainer requested discussion in issue
- You're unsure if this aligns with project philosophy
## Human Escalation Required
Escalate to human when:
- Reviewer asks clarifying questions about design intent
- CI fails in non-obvious way
- Any pushback beyond "fix this typo"
- Reviewer seems confused or frustrated
- You can't run the test suite locally
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!