pr-workflow

Enforce branch naming, commit hygiene, and PR title conventions.

11|1|Updated Jun 7, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/baseballyama/eslint-plugin-postgresql --skill pr-workflow-baseballyama
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agentβ–Ό
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: pr-workflow
Source: https://github.com/baseballyama/eslint-plugin-postgresql/tree/main/.claude/skills/pr-workflow
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/baseballyama/eslint-plugin-postgresql --skill pr-workflow-baseballyama

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

PR workflows often suffer from inconsistent branch names, vague commit messages, and unclear PR titles/bodies, slowing reviews and increasing context-switching. This skill enforces a standardized PR process to reduce review cycles and miscommunication.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Branch naming convention: enforces a consistent type/name pattern to make PRs easily searchable.
  • Commit hygiene: encourages meaningful, squashable commits and clear messages.
  • PR title and body conventions: ensures informative titles and structured bodies for reviewers.
  • Draft readiness checks: helps ensure all quality gates are met before leaving draft.

Quick Start

Ask Claude to guide you through opening a PR following the prescribed workflow.

Frequently Asked Questions about pr-workflow

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I enforce branch naming conventions for pull requests?β–Ό

Branch naming conventions enforce a consistent type/name pattern for pull requests, making PRs easily searchable and automatable. This standardization reduces review cycles by ensuring branches follow predictable formats across feature, fix, and chore branches.

What is commit hygiene and why does it matter for PR reviews?β–Ό

Commit hygiene encourages meaningful, squashable commits with clear messages for pull requests. Maintaining clean commit history reduces context-switching during PR reviews and ensures automated checks can validate message conventions before finalizing.

How do I structure a PR body for better code reviews?β–Ό

PR body conventions ensure informative titles and structured bodies for reviewers evaluating pull requests. Structuring the PR body with standardized sections provides reviewer clarity, enabling automated checks to validate that all quality gates are met before leaving draft status.

Can I automate draft readiness checks before opening a pull request?β–Ό

Draft readiness checks help ensure all quality gates are met before leaving draft status for pull requests. Automating PR preparation applies governance across opening, drafting, reviewing, and finalizing stages to reduce miscommunication and review cycles.

What's the best way to standardize PR titles across feature and fix branches?β–Ό

Standardizing PR titles requires enforcing consistent conventions across feature, fix, and chore branches in collaborative software projects. Applying structured title formats enables automated checks and provides reviewer clarity, reducing miscommunication during the pull request workflow.

Why does inconsistent branch naming slow down pull request reviews?β–Ό

Inconsistent branch naming and vague commit messages slow pull request reviews by increasing context-switching and miscommunication. Enforcing a standardized PR workflow with concrete branch naming formats and meaningful commit messages reduces review cycles across collaborative software projects.