Shapes turns action-first: action leads, steps numbered, state restated. Use for ADHD-friendly output. Do not use to trim tokens; use response-compression.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Prepares pull requests by running quality gates, drafting descriptions, and validating tests. Use when completing a feature and ready for review.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
sanctum:pr-review)sanctum:commit-messages)Use this skill to stage changes and generate a PR summary. Run Skill(sanctum:git-workspace-review) first to capture the repository state and diffs.
Create TodoWrite items for these steps before starting:
pr-prep:workspace-reviewedpr-prep:quality-gatespr-prep:self-reviewedpr-prep:changes-summarizedpr-prep:testing-documentedpr-prep:pr-draftedpr-prep:content-verifiedMark each item as complete as the section is finished.
workspace-reviewed)Confirm that Skill(sanctum:git-workspace-review) is complete. If changes were staged after the initial review, re-execute the skill to refresh the context.
quality-gates)Execute formatting, linting, and tests using project-specific commands
(e.g., make lint, make test). Resolve all failures before
proceeding. If a task cannot be executed locally, document the reason
and the alternative validation performed. Language-specific commands
and failure handling are detailed in modules/quality-gates.md.
If any plugin files changed (plugin.json, skills, commands,
agents, or hooks), run make docs-sync-check to verify
book/src/reference/capabilities-reference.md is current.
If it reports discrepancies, run /sync-capabilities --fix
or update the reference manually before proceeding.
self-reviewed)Read the diff as if you are a reviewer seeing it for the first time. This catches scope creep, stale debug code, and unclear changes before anyone else spends time on them.
Automated checks:
# Check for debug statements left in
git diff --cached --name-only | xargs grep -nE \
'(console\.log|print\(|debugger|TODO|FIXME|HACK|XXX)' \
2>/dev/null || true
# Check for commented-out code blocks (3+ consecutive lines)
git diff --cached | grep -c '^+.*//.*[a-zA-Z]' || true
# Check for formatting-only commits mixed with feature work
git log --oneline $(git merge-base HEAD origin/master)..HEAD | \
grep -iE '(fmt|format|lint|style|whitespace)' || true
Additive bias audit:
Run Skill(imbue:justify) to compute the additive bias
score and check Iron Law compliance. If the score is
YELLOW or above, justify each flagged signal before
proceeding. If RED or STOP, rethink the approach.
Manual verification:
TODO markers left inIf issues are found, fix them before proceeding.
changes-summarized)Start from the analyzer rather than from a fresh reading of the diff:
python3 "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/pr_prep_analyze.py" --base origin/main
It reads the branch's changed files and commits, sorts the files into
feature, test, docs and other, flags any ! breaking-change marker in
a commit subject, reports the quality gates it can decide from the
changed-file list (tests touched, docs touched, changes described),
recommends a merge strategy, and prints a description scaffold. Pass
--reviewer-map <json> to map path prefixes to reviewers, or --json
to consume it as data.
A gate printed unknown (null in JSON) means the script evaluated
nothing: it runs no test, lint or type check and makes no release
decision, so passes_checks and includes_breaking_changes always
read unknown. Treat unknown as "you must check this yourself",
never as a pass. Step 2 is where passes_checks gets its answer.
Then use the notes from the workspace review and the analyzer's categories to identify the key points in the diffs, and group them into 2-4 paragraphs highlighting the technical changes and their rationale. Note breaking changes, migrations, or documentation updates.
testing-documented)List each test command executed and its result. If tests were skipped, document the reason and the mitigation plan.
Attach a manual test plan when any of these hold:
Write it as numbered steps, each stating its expected result. A step
without an expected result is a step the reviewer cannot fail. Format
and examples are in modules/pr-template.md.
pr-drafted)Populate the template with the facts table (Who, Where, When), then
the Why and What-and-how sections, then Test plan and Checklist. Write
the title imperative and self-contained so it reads correctly in git log out of context.
All three table rows are filled on every PR. A row that does not apply
says so (External: none, on merge) rather than being deleted, so a
reader can tell an omitted blast radius from a blast radius of none.
Add issue references, screenshots, migration guides, or follow-up
items as the change calls for them. Template structure, worked
examples, and size variations are in modules/pr-template.md. The
decision behind the structure, with its sources, is recorded in
docs/adr/0021-pr-descriptions-in-two-registers.md.
content-verified)Apply Skill(scribe:slop-detector) principles to the draft. Verify that the PR description avoids tier-1 slop words (delve, comprehensive, leverage, utilize, robust, seamless) and formulaic phrases like "I'd be happy to" or "It should be noted." Ensure there is no AI attribution in the text and that all claims are grounded with evidence such as commands, numbers, or filenames. Use active voice and maintain a balanced structure with prose for context.
If the description contains slop, apply Skill(scribe:doc-generator) principles to ground claims with specifics, remove marketing language, and use direct statements.
Write the final PR description to the specified path, then display the file path and its contents for confirmation.
Do not include tool or AI attribution in the PR text. If changes are required mid-process, re-run quality gates. This skill covers preparation; pushing changes and opening the PR occurs outside this workflow.
If project-specific commands like make or npm are unavailable, verify the environment setup against the README. For permission errors, check write access to build directories. If a step fails without clear output, retry the command with verbose flags to inspect the logs.
pr-prep:workspace-reviewed through
pr-prep:content-verified) are marked complete before the
skill declares doneunknown has been decided by
hand, because unknown means nothing evaluated it: the script
runs no test, lint or type check, so passes_checks and
includes_breaking_changes always arrive that wayExternal: half of Whereimbue:justify is GREEN, or YELLOW
with each flagged signal explicitly justifiedまだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Shapes turns action-first: action leads, steps numbered, state restated. Use for ADHD-friendly output. Do not use to trim tokens; use response-compression.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Inverts burden of proof for code additions. Use when reviewing PRs, planning refactors, or running unbloat to challenge every addition's necessity.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Tracks per-agent token usage and flags waste in parallel dispatch. Use when evaluating parallel agent efficiency or after a multi-agent run.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Coordinates Claude agent teams via filesystem protocol. Use when orchestrating parallel agents with task dependencies. Do not use for single-agent tasks.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Evaluates API surface design, consistency, and exemplar alignment. Use when reviewing public API changes or before releasing a new API surface.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Selects architecture paradigm via research before scaffolding. Use when architecture is undecided and the choice needs justification and documentation.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。