openclaw-pr-maintainer

Review and triage OpenClaw pull requests with labels and comments.

1|Updated Mar 30, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Arry8/openclaw-edge --skill openclaw-pr-maintainer
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: openclaw-pr-maintainer
Source: https://github.com/Arry8/openclaw-edge/tree/main/.agents/skills/openclaw-pr-maintainer
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Arry8/openclaw-edge --skill openclaw-pr-maintainer

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Automates and standardizes maintainer workflows for reviewing, triaging, labeling, and finalizing OpenClaw pull requests and related issues.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Enforces maintainer-style decision making with label rules, safe comment templates, and review-thread follow-ups.
  • Helps validate bug-fix claims, search for related issues/PRs, and prepare decisions before merge.
  • Provides safety-focused guidelines to avoid premature or unsafe merges.

Quick Start

Review an open PR and apply the appropriate labels and comments following the maintainer workflow.

Frequently Asked Questions about openclaw-pr-maintainer

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I streamline pull request triage for my GitHub repository?

You streamline pull request triage by applying standardized maintainer workflows that enforce label rules, validate bug-fix claims, and prepare structured comments to reduce merge risks and mislabeling.

What is the best way to validate bug-fix claims before merging a pull request?

Validating bug-fix claims involves searching for related issues and PRs, applying decision guidelines, and ensuring proper follow-up on review threads to confirm the fix satisfies requirements before merging.

Can I automate maintainer labeling and comment templates for code reviews?

Yes, you can automate maintainer-style decision making by enforcing label rules and using safe comment templates during code reviews, which standardizes triage and reduces manual errors.

How do I ensure proper follow-up on GitHub review threads before a merge?

Ensuring proper follow-up on review threads requires applying structured decision processes and safety-focused guidelines that verify all review comments are addressed before merging.

What safety guidelines should I follow to avoid premature or unsafe merges?

To avoid premature or unsafe merges, follow safety-focused guidelines that provide automated checks, validate bug-fix claims, and enforce structured decision processes ensuring all review threads are resolved.