Generate structured PR descriptions from diffs, add review checklists, risk assessments, and test coverage summaries. Use when the user says "write a PR description", "improve this PR", "summarize my changes", "PR review", "pull request", or asks to document a diff for reviewers.
Scanned 9/3/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add Ghosteken/agent-harness --skill comprehensive-review-pr-enhance --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Comprehensive Review Pr Enhance?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/ghosteken-comprehensive-review-pr-enhance)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: comprehensive-review-pr-enhance
description: Generate structured PR descriptions from diffs, add review checklists, risk assessments, and test coverage summaries. Use when the user says "write a PR description", "improve this PR", "summarize my changes", "PR review", "pull request", or asks to document a diff for reviewers.
---
# Pull Request Enhancement
## When to Use
- You need to turn a git diff into a reviewer-friendly pull request description.
- You want a PR summary with change categories, risks, testing notes, and a checklist.
- The diff is large enough that reviewers need explicit structure instead of a short ad hoc summary.
## Workflow
1. Run `git diff <base>...HEAD --stat` to identify changed files and scope
2. Categorise changes: source, test, config, docs, build, styles
3. Generate the PR description using the template below
4. Add a review checklist based on which file categories changed
5. Flag breaking changes, security-sensitive files, or large diffs (>500 lines)
## PR Description Template
```markdown
## Summary
<!-- one-paragraph executive summary: what changed and why -->
## Changes
| Category | Files | Key change |
|----------|-------|------------|
| source | `src/auth.ts` | added OAuth2 PKCE flow |
| test | `tests/auth.test.ts` | covers token refresh edge case |
| config | `.env.example` | new `OAUTH_CLIENT_ID` var |
## Why
<!-- link to issue/ticket + one sentence on motivation -->
## Testing
- [ ] unit tests pass (`npm test`)
- [ ] manual smoke test on staging
- [ ] no coverage regression
## Risks & Rollback
- **Breaking?** yes / no
- **Rollback**: revert this commit; no migration needed
- **Risk level**: low / medium / high — because ___
```
## Review Checklist Rules
Add checklist sections only when the matching file category appears in the diff:
| File category | Checklist items |
|---------------|----------------|
| source | no debug statements, functions <50 lines, descriptive names, error handling |
| test | meaningful assertions, edge cases, no flaky tests, AAA pattern |
| config | no hardcoded secrets, env vars documented, backwards compatible |
| docs | accurate, examples included, changelog updated |
| security-sensitive (`auth`, `crypto`, `token`, `password` in path) | input validation, no secrets in logs, authz correct |
## Splitting Large PRs
When diff exceeds 20 files or 1000 lines, suggest splitting by feature area:
```
git checkout -b feature/part-1
git cherry-pick <commits-for-part-1>
```
## Resources
- `resources/implementation-playbook.md` — Python helpers for automated PR analysis, coverage reports, and risk scoring
## Limitations
- Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
- Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
- Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.
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!