Release flow (develop → main, automated Release PR)

This skill drives releases for repos wired with the JarvusInnovations/infra-components release actions. The whole model is a single long-lived Release PR from develop into main; merging it publishes. Your job is to get that PR's title (version) and body (release notes) right, then merge it on the user's go.

How the automation works

Three GitHub Actions, each triggered by a different event — you don't run them, you react to them:

ci.yml (build + test on push/PR to main and develop) runs orthogonally and must be green like any other check.

Key consequences for how you work:

• You never invent the changelog. The bot comment is the source of truth for which

commits are in the release and how they're attributed. Pull it, don't reconstruct it from git log (you'll miss the @author suffixes and risk a different commit set).

• Editing the PR re-triggers release-validate. After you change the title or body,

give it a few seconds and confirm the latest validate run is green before telling the user it's ready.

• The bot's title is always last-tag + patch. release-prepare does no commit

analysis and never revisits the title after creation — recomputing the bump from the changelog and retitling is always your job (step 6), not an occasional correction.

• Title and body are safe to draft early. Later develop pushes only refresh the

changelog comment; nothing you write in the title or body ever gets clobbered.

• The body is not gated. release-validate checks only the title and tag — a PR

whose body is still the default near-empty template validates green and, once merged, ships that template verbatim as the release notes. Getting the body right before merge is entirely on you.

Detecting that this workflow is in effect

Before assuming this skill applies, confirm the repo actually uses it:

ls .github/workflows/ | grep -E 'release-(prepare|validate|publish)'
gh pr list --state open --json number,title | jq '.[] | select(.title|startswith("Release: v"))'

Either signal — a release-prepare.yml (or sibling) workflow, or an open Release: v* PR — means this is the flow. If neither is present, this skill doesn't apply; fall back to the repo's own release docs.

The procedure

1. Find (or open) the Release PR

gh pr list --state open --json number,title | jq '.[] | select(.title|startswith("Release: v"))'

• PR exists → work with it (steps 2+).
• No PR, but develop has unreleased commits → the PR is opened by pushing develop.

Confirm there's unpushed/unreleased work (git log origin/main..develop --oneline), then git push origin develop and wait for release-prepare to open the PR. Pushing is non-destructive — it only opens a PR for review; it does not publish.

• No PR and nothing unreleased → tell the user there's nothing to release.

2. Read the current PR state

gh pr view <number> --json title,body,number,url,baseRefName,headRefName

3. Pull the bot changelog (source of truth)

gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<number>/comments \
  --jq '.[] | select(.body | contains("## Changelog")) | .body'

Parse the commit lines from inside the fenced code block. Keep each line exactly as written, including the @username suffix. If there's no such comment yet, release-prepare may still be running — wait and retry before falling back to git log origin/main..develop.

4. Sort commits into two sections

Decide each line by who cares about the change, not just the commit type:

• Improvements — user/stakeholder-facing capabilities and significant user-facing

fixes. Things that matter to people who use the thing, not just build it.

• Technical — everything else: CI/CD, refactors, docs, internal tooling, chores.

Note feat(ci), feat(exp) and similar developer-scoped feats are Technical, and docs commits are Technical (developer-facing). Type is a signal; scope + description decide it.

Omit a section that has no commits (no empty headers).

5. Draft the release notes

Optional one-sentence headline (write one if the improvements warrant it; omit for a purely technical release)

## Improvements

- <commit line, verbatim, with @author>
- <commit line>

## Technical

- <commit line>
- <commit line>

6. Recommend a version bump

Read the current version from the PR title, then apply semver against what's actually in the changelog:

• Minor (v1.0.x → v1.1.0) — there are real user-facing Improvements (a new

command, feature, or capability). This is the common case when feat commits land.

• Patch (v1.0.0 → v1.0.1) — only fixes/technical/chore work; nothing new for users.
• Major (v1.x → v2.0.0) — a breaking change (commit body notes BREAKING CHANGE,

or you know the public surface broke). Confirm with the user before recommending major.

State your reasoning in one line. Always recompute — this is not optional. The bot's pre-filled title is mechanically last-tag + patch, computed once at PR creation with no commit analysis; it is never the product of judgment. Recompute the bump yourself from the changelog (feats ⇒ minor, breaking ⇒ major) and retitle whenever your answer differs.

An rc title is also valid: Release: vX.Y.Z-rc.N passes validation and publishes as a GitHub prerelease. Use it to cut a candidate before the final vX.Y.Z, which then goes through this same flow.

7. Present the draft and get the call

Show the user: the formatted notes, your version recommendation + why, and the PR URL. Ask whether to approve as-is, edit, or change the bump. Merging publishes, so the merge is always the user's explicit go — never merge unprompted.

8. On approval — apply and merge

# Body (always); title whenever your recomputed version differs from the current title
gh pr edit <number> --body-file <notes-file>
gh pr edit <number> --title "Release: v<version>"

Editing re-triggers release-validate — wait a few seconds, confirm it's green:

gh run list --workflow=release-validate.yml --limit 1 --json status,conclusion

Then merge to publish:

gh pr merge <number> --merge

release-publish fires on merge. Watch it through and confirm the published artifact (e.g. npm view <pkg> version, or the new tag/GitHub release) before declaring done.

Then verify the release notes actually landed:

gh release view v<version> --json body --jq .body

If the body is the unedited template (bare ## Improvements / ## Technical headers), fix it: gh release edit v<version> --notes-file <notes-file>. One residual race to know about: release-publish reads the body from the closed-PR webhook payload, so a body edited seconds before the merge can lose the race. Avoid last-moment body edits — finalize the body, confirm validate is green, then merge.

Notes and gotchas

• Use gh-axi if available (a token-efficient gh wrapper); otherwise plain gh.

Either works — the API calls are the same.

• Write the body from a file (--body-file) rather than a giant inline --body —

multi-line markdown survives intact and you avoid shell-quoting accidents.

• main can look "behind" the latest tag. Some setups tag a CI bump commit that never

lands on the main branch ref. It looks odd but doesn't block: release-prepare computes the default title from the last tag alone (git describe --tags + patch increment) regardless. Flag it to the user as a known quirk, not a blocker.

• **release-validate fires on every PR into main** — the workflow trigger has no

title filter. A hotfix PR to main shows a red "PR title must match format" check by design. Don't "fix" it by retitling a non-release PR; the red check is expected there.

• A red release-validate after the tag already exists is usually benign — it's a

re-run reporting "version already exists" after a successful publish. Check when it ran relative to the merge before treating it as a real failure.

• A repo can override the default PR body template via .github/release-pr-template.md

(see references/workflow-internals.md). Prefer one that fails obviously when unedited — e.g. a <!-- DRAFT: replace before merging --> sentinel — since the default near-empty template looks deceptively publish-ready.

• See references/workflow-internals.md for the workflow file shapes and the

infra-components action refs, when you need to inspect or set up the automation itself.