Generates structured changelogs and release notes from git history and PRs, classifying breaking changes, features, fixes, performance, docs. Triggers on: "generate changelog", "write release notes", "what changed since", "prepare release", "release notes for", "diff since tag".
Scanned 5/27/2026
Install via CLI
openskills install Mathews-Tom/armory---
name: changelog-composer
description: 'Generates structured changelogs and release notes from git history and PRs, classifying breaking changes, features, fixes, performance, docs. Triggers on: "generate changelog", "write release notes", "what changed since", "prepare release", "release notes for", "diff since tag".'
metadata:
version: 1.1.1
category: content
tags: [changelog, release-notes, git-history, versioning]
difficulty: intermediate
phase: ship
---
# Changelog Composer
Transforms raw git history and PR descriptions into polished, audience-appropriate
changelogs. Parses conventional commits, classifies changes by impact category, filters
internal-only modifications, and produces structured release notes with PR links —
following Keep a Changelog conventions.
## Reference Files
| File | Contents | Load When |
| ------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------ |
| `references/conventional-commits.md` | Commit type parsing, scope extraction, breaking change indicators | Repository uses conventional commits |
| `references/categorization-rules.md` | Change classification logic, audience filtering, severity ordering | Always |
| `references/audience-filter.md` | User-facing vs internal change detection, exclusion patterns | Always |
| `references/changelog-formats.md` | Keep a Changelog, GitHub Releases, announcement copy templates | Format selection needed |
## Prerequisites
- **git** — access to the repository history
- **gh** (optional) — GitHub CLI for PR description extraction
- A tagging strategy (semver tags) for identifying release boundaries
## Workflow
### Phase 1: Gather Raw Changes
Collect all changes between the previous release and the current state:
1. **Identify boundaries** — Find the last release tag: `git describe --tags --abbrev=0`.
If no tags exist, use the initial commit or a user-specified starting point.
2. **Extract commits** — `git log <last-tag>..HEAD --oneline --no-merges`
3. **Extract PR titles** — `gh pr list --state merged --base main --search "merged:>YYYY-MM-DD"`
or parse merge commit messages.
4. **Parse conventional commits** — If the repository follows conventional commits
(`feat:`, `fix:`, `docs:`, etc.), extract type, scope, and description. See
`references/conventional-commits.md`.
5. **Collect breaking change indicators** — Look for `BREAKING CHANGE:` in commit
bodies, `!` after type (`feat!:`), or explicit annotations in PR descriptions.
### Phase 2: Classify Changes
Categorize each change by its impact:
| Category | Conventional Commit Type | Indicators |
| ---------------- | ----------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------- |
| Breaking Changes | `feat!:`, `BREAKING CHANGE:` | API removal, signature change, behavior change |
| Features | `feat:` | New capability, new endpoint, new command |
| Fixes | `fix:` | Bug correction, error handling improvement |
| Performance | `perf:` | Speed improvement, memory reduction |
| Documentation | `docs:` | README, API docs, guides |
| Internal | `chore:`, `ci:`, `refactor:`, `test:`, `build:` | No user-facing impact |
For repositories without conventional commits, classify by reading the commit message
and changed files. Code changes to public API → Feature or Fix. Test-only changes → Internal.
### Phase 3: Filter for Audience
1. **Exclude internal changes** by default:
- CI/CD configuration changes
- Test additions/modifications
- Dependency bumps (unless security-relevant)
- Code refactoring with no behavior change
- Build system changes
2. **Include internal changes** only when:
- They represent significant architecture shifts users should know about
- They affect development workflow (contributing guide changes)
- The changelog targets developers, not end-users
3. **Highlight breaking changes** prominently — always at the top, always with migration
guidance.
### Phase 4: Compose Entries
For each included change, write a human-readable description:
1. **Lead with the impact** — "Users can now..." or "Fixed issue where..."
2. **Be specific** — "Reduced memory usage by 40% for large file processing" not
"Performance improvements"
3. **Include migration guidance** for breaking changes — what the user must change
4. **Link to source** — PR number, issue number, or commit hash
### Phase 5: Output
Assemble the changelog in the requested format, ordered by severity:
1. Breaking Changes (always first)
2. Features
3. Fixes
4. Performance
5. Documentation
## Output Format
```text
## [{version}] - {YYYY-MM-DD}
### Breaking Changes
- **`function_name` parameter renamed** — `old_param` is now `new_param`.
Migration: find/replace `old_param=` with `new_param=` in all call sites. ([#{pr}]({url}))
### Features
- **{Feature name}** — {What it enables and why it matters}. ([#{pr}]({url}))
### Fixes
- Fixed {symptom} when {condition}. ([#{pr}]({url}))
### Performance
- {Operation} is now {X}x faster / uses {X}% less memory. ([#{pr}]({url}))
### Documentation
- Added {guide/reference} for {topic}. ([#{pr}]({url}))
```
## Configuring Scope
| Mode | Input | Output | When to Use |
| --------- | -------------------------- | ------------------------ | ----------------------------- |
| `release` | Tag-to-HEAD | Full changelog entry | Preparing a versioned release |
| `sprint` | Date range or commit range | Summary of changes | Sprint review, status update |
| `pr` | Single PR | One-line changelog entry | PR description template |
## Calibration Rules
1. **User impact first.** Every entry should answer "what does this mean for the user?"
not "what did the developer do?"
2. **Breaking changes are non-negotiable.** Never omit or bury breaking changes. They
go first, with migration guidance.
3. **Specific over vague.** "Fixed login timeout on slow connections" beats "Fixed bug."
"Added CSV export for reports" beats "New feature."
4. **Link everything.** Every entry links to its source PR or issue. Users who want
details can follow the link.
5. **Exclude noise.** Internal refactoring, dependency bumps, and CI changes do not
belong in user-facing changelogs unless they have user-visible impact.
## Error Handling
| Problem | Resolution |
| ------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| No tags exist in repository | Ask for a starting commit or date. Default to the initial commit if the repository is small. |
| Repository doesn't use conventional commits | Classify by reading commit messages and changed files. Note reduced classification accuracy. |
| PR descriptions are empty or low-quality | Fall back to commit messages. Flag entries that may need manual review. |
| Ambiguous change classification | Default to "Features" for additions, "Fixes" for modifications. Mark uncertain entries for review. |
| Too many changes for a single release | Group by component/module. Consider whether the release should be split. |
| Merge commits obscure individual changes | Use `--no-merges` to skip merge commits. Parse individual commits within merged PRs. |
## When NOT to Compose
Push back if:
- The user wants to auto-publish release notes without review — changelogs require human judgment
- The repository has no meaningful commit history (single "initial commit" with everything)
- The request is for marketing copy, not technical release notes — different skill
- The changes are not yet merged — changelog is for shipped changes, not in-progress work
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!