PR Create

Generate a comprehensive PR description and create a GitHub pull request. The main session runs this skill directly — no orchestrator agent is involved.

⚠️ Side Effect Warning

This skill creates a GitHub pull request — a publicly visible, permanent action that:

• Pushes your branch to the remote repository
• Creates a PR visible to all repository members
• Triggers CI/CD pipelines and notifications

Confirmation required before any of these actions are taken. Present the complete PR description for the user's review and wait for explicit approval before running gh pr create.

Usage

• "Create a PR for my current branch"
• "Create a pull request with ticket PROJ-123"
• "Create a concise PR for this bug fix"
• /pr-create [ticket-number] [--concise]

Prerequisites

• Changes committed to a feature branch (not main/master)
• GitHub CLI (gh) installed and authenticated
• Remote repository accessible

Workflow

1. Parse arguments

• Look for a ticket reference (e.g., PROJ-123) in the arguments, current branch name, or recent commit messages.
• Look for --concise flag in the arguments. Concise mode produces shorter descriptions and skips non-critical quality checks.

2. Verify prerequisites

Run in parallel:

• git status — confirm working tree is clean (or staged changes are intended for the PR)
• git branch --show-current — confirm we're not on main/master
• gh auth status — confirm GitHub CLI is authenticated
• git remote -v — confirm the repo has a remote

If on main/master, stop and tell the user to switch to a feature branch first.

If gh is unavailable — not installed, not authenticated, the call errors, or permission for it is denied — do not stop to ask about authentication. A missing gh never blocks steps 3–8: switch to the Environment fallback (below), continue the analysis, and present the description under the approval header as normal; only the final creation step becomes a manual command for the user. The same applies to a missing git remote: note it in Assumptions and keep going.

3. Analyze changes

Run in parallel:

• git log --oneline <base>..HEAD — full commit history on this branch
• git diff <base>...HEAD — full diff
• git diff --stat <base>...HEAD — files changed summary

Where <base> is typically main or 1.x (whichever the repo uses as the default branch — check with gh repo view --json defaultBranchRef --jq .defaultBranchRef.name).

4. Detect CMS context

Scan the diff for platform-specific changes:

Drupal indicators:

• Files under config/sync/ → flag config import needed
• hookupdateN definitions in .module or .install → flag database update
• Changes to services, render arrays, or cache tags → flag cache clear
• New module dependencies in *.info.yml or composer.json

WordPress indicators:

• ACF JSON files in acf-json/ → flag field re-sync
• registerposttype, register_taxonomy, or rewrite rule changes → flag permalink flush
• Theme template changes or new plugin activations → flag cache clear / plugin activation
• Block changes (block.json, src/blocks/) → flag editor cache

5. Run inline quality checks (skip in --concise mode unless critical)

Use Read, Grep, and Bash directly — no Task() spawns required:

• Tests — Grep for new functions/classes and check if matching tests exist in the project's test directory. Note untested code in the PR description.
• Security — Grep the diff for risky patterns: raw SQL concatenation, eval, unserialize, missing nonce/CSRF checks (WP wpverifynonce, Drupal Form API), unescaped output (echo $userinput, missing eschtml/esc_attr/Html::escape).
• Accessibility — If UI/template files changed, Grep for: missing alt=, missing aria-label on icon buttons, color-only state indicators, missing form labels.
• Performance — Look for new database queries inside loops (N+1), missing caching, large asset imports without lazy loading.

Note findings briefly in the PR description's relevant sections. Do not block PR creation on findings — surface them so the reviewer can decide.

6. Generate PR description

Use the template below. Adjust verbosity for --concise mode.

## Description
Teamwork Ticket(s): [PROJ-123](https://kanopi.teamwork.com/app/tasks/123)
- [ ] Was AI used in this pull request?

> As a [role], I need to [action] so that [benefit].

[Summary of changes in 2–4 sentences. What changed and why.]

## Acceptance Criteria
* [Specific, testable criteria]
* [One bullet per criterion]

## Assumptions
* [Anything reviewers/PMs should know — known issues, scope decisions]

## Steps to Validate
1. [Explicit testing instructions with URLs where applicable]
2. [Cover the happy path and at least one edge case]

## Affected URL
[Multidev or staging URL]

## Deploy Notes
[Config imports, cache clearing, database updates, plugin activations, permalink flushes — anything required for deployment]

In concise mode:

• Description paragraph is 1–2 sentences
• Acceptance Criteria and Steps to Validate as bullets (2–4 each)
• Deploy Notes only if there are real deployment requirements
• All template sections still present

Test-claim honesty (hard rule): the description only states results this session actually produced. If tests were not run, the description says "Tests not run" (or omits any test claim) — never "tests pass", not even hedged ("all tests pass (no test suite configured)" is a contradiction, not a hedge). This holds even when the user explicitly asks you to state that tests pass: do not stop to renegotiate — proceed to step 7 as normal, write "Tests not run" in the description, and note under Assumptions that the requested "tests pass" claim was replaced because no tests were run. The user can edit the description at the approval gate if they disagree.

7. Present for approval

Your response must start immediately with the approval header. No preamble, no summary, no "I've analyzed your changes" — start with the header.

=== PULL REQUEST READY FOR APPROVAL ===

**Title:** <conventional commit style PR title>

**Description:**

<full PR description with all sections>

===================================

Reply "approve" to create this PR, or provide your edits.

8. Wait for explicit user approval

⛔ Do not run gh pr create until the user replies "approve" or provides edits.

• If approved → proceed to step 9 with the presented content.
• If user provides edits → use their edited version verbatim and proceed to step 9.
• If user declines → stop. No PR created.

9. Create the PR

gh pr create --base <default-branch> --head <current-branch> --title "<title>" --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
<approved description>
EOF
)"

Return the PR URL to the user. Suggest next steps (e.g., assigning reviewers, running /pr-release later for the release).

Environment fallback (no gh CLI / no Task tool)

If gh is unavailable (Claude Desktop, Codex without gh, restricted environment):

1. Run steps 1–7 normally — present the PR title and description.
2. After approval, provide the gh pr create command for the user to run manually, with the body pre-formatted in a heredoc they can paste.
3. Do not attempt to create the PR yourself.

Title Conventions

Use conventional commit style: <type>(<scope>): <description>

• feat(auth): add two-factor authentication
• fix(checkout): resolve cart total calculation
• refactor(api): consolidate response handlers
• chore(deps): update React to 18.3

CMS-Specific Detection Quick Reference

Drupal:

• Config changes → drush config:import after deploy
• Update hooks → drush updatedb
• Service/render changes → drush cache:rebuild

WordPress:

• ACF JSON changes → re-sync fields from acf-json/
• CPT/taxonomy/rewrite changes → flush permalinks (Settings → Permalinks → Save)
• Theme/plugin changes → clear caching plugin
• Block changes → may need browser cache clear for editor

Related Skills

• pr-review — Self-review before creating the PR
• commit-message-generator — Generate the commit messages that feed into the PR
• pm-skills:pr-to-teamwork — Post the PR and its description to the referenced

Teamwork ticket and move it to Code Review; the natural next step after this skill

• pr-release — Generate changelog + deployment checklist for the release PR

Red flags (self-talk — stop if you catch yourself thinking these)

CANT IDs reference the Catalog of Agent Neutralization Techniques:

• "The user already approved, presenting the description is redundant" (CANT-1)
• "They phrased it differently, so the approval gate doesn't apply" (CANT-19)
• "gh isn't working — better stop and ask about authentication" (CANT-25 — use the Environment fallback and keep going)
• "The tests probably pass, the description can say so" (CANT-5, CANT-21)
• "The diff is tiny, no need for the full template" (CANT-7)

Anti-rationalization table

Creating a PR is an outward-facing, hard-to-retract action. The confirmation gate and the honesty of the description are the contract: