Skip to content

docs(skills): add prose-pass skill for comment and changelog brevity - #1035

Open
sirtimid wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
sirtimid/prose-pass-skill
Open

docs(skills): add prose-pass skill for comment and changelog brevity#1035
sirtimid wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
sirtimid/prose-pass-skill

Conversation

@sirtimid

@sirtimid sirtimid commented Aug 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Comments, changelog entries, and PR bodies here kept needing the same correction: cut whatever a reader can derive from the code. That standard lived in per-session reminders rather than in the repo, so it only applied when someone remembered to give it. This checks it in.

prose-pass states the bar — the default is no comment, and accuracy alone does not justify one — then the judgements that follow: restatements, log-call preambles, TDD scaffolding, and rationale duplicated across files go; constraints, invariants, and test-shape rationale stay. Every rule is framed as information content rather than phrasing. The openers section is deliberate about this: it lists the patterns models produce constantly (Ensure, This ensures, Note that) but treats them as a signal to inspect rather than a delete list, so // Note that N must stay a power of two. survives.

Changes

  • .claude/skills/prose-pass/SKILL.md — the standard, with separate sections for changelogs (the consumer test) and PR bodies (which need the narrative and testing note a changelog must not carry)
  • commit, pr, and update-changelogs invoke it; commit's checks now run after it, since the pass can rename identifiers or extract functions
  • code-review reads it as review criteria rather than invoking it — it edits files, and a review may have nothing checked out
  • AGENTS.md points at the file by path, so agents with no Skill tool can still comply

Testing

No code changed, so this is prettier plus review of the text itself. Three review passes found real defects: the skill originally instructed deletions that break jsdoc/require-description, banned the testing note the pr skill requires in a PR body, and swept comments only after the review subagents had run. Each is fixed in the follow-up commits.


Note

Low Risk
Documentation and Claude skill workflow changes only; no runtime or package behavior changes.

Overview
Adds a checked-in prose-pass skill that defines when to cut comments, JSDoc, changelog lines, and PR prose (default: no comment unless the code cannot carry the information), and wires it into agent workflows.

commit now runs the pass on the diff before staging and moves lint-build-test to after the pass so renames or comment trims do not fail checks prematurely. pr runs it on diff comments before automated review (with optional trim commit/push), on the drafted PR body before gh pr create, and on changelog drafts via args="changelogs". update-changelogs and code-review reference the same standard (review reads criteria only; it does not invoke the skill). AGENTS.md links the skill for agents without the Skill tool, and .claude/settings.json allows Skill(prose-pass).

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 51ff46d. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

Codifies the standard for comments, changelog entries, and PR bodies as a shared skill, and wires it into the commit, pr, and update-changelogs flows.
Review found the skill instructing edits that break jsdoc/require-description, banning the test summary the pr skill requires in a PR body, and sweeping comments after the review subagents had already run.
…ning it

prose-pass edits files and returns no findings, so a review of a remote PR had nothing to act on.
@sirtimid
sirtimid requested a review from a team as a code owner August 27, 2026 12:09
@sirtimid sirtimid added the no-changelog Indicates that no changelog updates are required, and that related CI checks should be skipped. label Aug 27, 2026
…ctors

The pass runs before every commit, so its diff must stay predictable: comments out, at most one identifier renamed.
@cursor
cursor Bot requested review from FUDCo, grypez and rekmarks August 27, 2026 12:17

@cursor cursor Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes and found 1 potential issue.

Fix All in Cursor

❌ Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with cloud agents, have a team admin enable autofix in the Cursor dashboard.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 51ff46d. Configure here.

## Phase 4: Create the PR

1. Run `gh pr create` to create a pull request. The PR body should include:
1. Draft the PR body, then run the prose pass over the body: Skill tool with skill="prose-pass". The comments were already swept in Phase 1; this pass is for the body only.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unscoped prose pass after review

Medium Severity

Phase 4 invokes prose-pass with no args, so the default full pass still judges comments and may rename identifiers after review. Those file edits are not committed before gh pr create, and can land unreviewed in the later changelog commit.

Additional Locations (1)
Fix in Cursor Fix in Web

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 51ff46d. Configure here.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Coverage Report

Status Category Percentage Covered / Total
🔵 Lines 72.55%
⬆️ +0.01%
9697 / 13365
🔵 Statements 72.4%
🟰 ±0%
9860 / 13617
🔵 Functions 72.99%
🟰 ±0%
2276 / 3118
🔵 Branches 66.91%
⬆️ +0.02%
3990 / 5963
File CoverageNo changed files found.
Generated in workflow #4701 for commit 51ff46d by the Vitest Coverage Report Action

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

no-changelog Indicates that no changelog updates are required, and that related CI checks should be skipped.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant