Write a pull request description that explains the why, the risk, and how to test. Use when the user mentions PR description, pull request text, write the PR, changelog for a change, or asks for a pull request description. Engineering skill by Yasir Jilani.
Scanned 9/30/2026
npx -y skills add SYasJ/claude-business-skills --skill pr-description --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Pr Description?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/syasj-pr-description)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.
---
name: pr-description
description: "Write a pull request description that explains the why, the risk, and how to test. Use when the user mentions PR description, pull request text, write the PR, changelog for a change, or asks for a pull request description. Engineering skill by Yasir Jilani."
license: MIT
compatibility: Agent Skills standard. No network access, extra packages, or credentials required.
metadata:
author: Yasir Jilani
version: "1.0.0"
domain: engineering
---
<!-- GENERATED FILE - edits here are overwritten by scripts/generate.py.
Edit the 'pr-description' entry in source/, then run:
python3 scripts/generate.py && python3 scripts/validate.py
See CONTRIBUTING.md. -->
# Pull Request Description
Write a pull request description that explains the why, the risk, and how to test.
## When to use this skill
Use this skill when the user:
- PR description
- pull request text
- write the PR
- changelog for a change
## When not to use this skill
- The user wants a different domain's specialist skill.
- The task requires a licensed professional to decide, and the user only needs a referral note rather than a draft.
- The request asks you to deceive, evade a control, or hide material facts.
## Professional boundary
Prefer the repository's existing patterns. Do not disable security controls, invent credentials, or introduce network calls the user did not ask for.
## Operating boundaries
- Use only information the user provides or files they explicitly ask you to read. Do not invent metrics, laws, citations, prices, credentials, or clinical facts.
- Do not ask for passwords, API keys, tokens, seed phrases, one-time codes, or payment card data.
- Do not send data to an external service, install packages, or add network calls as part of this skill.
- Separate facts, assumptions, and recommendations. If a required input is missing, state the assumption or ask one focused question.
- If the user asks you to deceive a person, evade a control, forge a record, or cause harm, stop. Offer a legitimate alternative.
- Work product that affects money, employment, health, safety, or legal rights is a draft for a qualified human to review before it is used.
## Inputs to collect
- What changed
- Why
- How to test
- Risks and rollout
## Workflow
### 1. Why
The user or operator problem, not a restatement of the diff.
### 2. What
The approach in a few lines. Point to the design if there is one.
### 3. Test
The steps a reviewer can run, and the cases you did not test.
### 4. Risk
Migrations, flags, and user-visible changes.
### 5. Screens or samples
Only if the user supplied them. Do not invent output.
### 6. Rollback
One line on how to undo the change.
## Output
Deliver a **pull request description**.
- Purpose of this pull request description, in two sentences.
- Facts the user supplied, listed separately from assumptions.
- The work itself, in the structure the workflow names.
- Open questions, risks, and the single next action with an owner.
- What a qualified reviewer still needs to confirm, if the domain is regulated.
## Quality bar
- Every number, date, name, and citation came from the user or is marked as an assumption.
- The artifact can be used without reading this skill again.
- Recommendations are specific enough that someone could accept or reject them.
- Boundaries were respected: no credentials requested, no unsupported professional claim, no deception.
## Example
### Scenario
Aisha Rahman, engineering lead at Fieldnote in Edmonton, needs a pull request description by 30 September 2026. A PR titled 'updates' changes a payment calculation and the description is empty.
### Example data
```text
From: Aisha Rahman, engineering lead
Organization: Fieldnote, Edmonton
Date: 14 September 2026
Needed by: 30 September 2026
A PR titled 'updates' changes a payment calculation and the description is empty.
What changed: requested 14 September 2026. Not yet approved
Why: A PR titled 'updates' changes a payment calculation and the description is empty
How to test: Invoice job, last reviewed 14 September 2026. No owner named since
Risks and rollout: Checkout service is open. No score in the file
```
### Example outcome
**Pull request description**
To: Aisha Rahman, engineering lead, Fieldnote
Date: 14 September 2026 · Needed by: 30 September 2026
**Decision**
States the payment behavior, the missing test if none was run, and the rollback.
**What the file supports**
| Input | Value | Status |
| --- | --- | --- |
| What changed | requested 14 September 2026. Not yet approved | Needs confirmation |
| Why | A PR titled 'updates' changes a payment calculation and the description is empty | Carried into the draft |
| How to test | Invoice job, last reviewed 14 September 2026. No owner named since | Carried into the draft |
| Risks and rollout | Checkout service is open. No score in the file | Needs confirmation |
**How this draft was built**
**1. Why**
The user or operator problem, not a restatement of the diff.
**2. What**
The approach in a few lines. Point to the design if there is one.
**3. Test**
The steps a reviewer can run, and the cases you did not test.
**4. Risk**
Migrations, flags, and user-visible changes.
**5. Screens or samples**
Only if the user supplied them. Do not invent output.
**Deliberately not done**
- A description that says 'fix bug'.
- Claiming tests you did not run.
- Hidden migration risk.
**Open items for a human**
- Confirm every row marked *Needs confirmation* above before this leaves draft.
- Anything absent from the file stayed absent. No figure, date, or name was supplied from outside it.
Next: Aisha Rahman by 30 September 2026. This is a draft, not a sign-off.
## Anti-patterns
- A description that says 'fix bug'.
- Claiming tests you did not run.
- Hidden migration risk.
## Related skills
- `code-review-standard`
- `release-checklist`
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!