Systematic PR preparation that validates tests and generates high-quality PR bodies.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionpr-prepExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches pr-prep from boshu2/agentops and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate pr-prep. Access via /pr-prep in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
0
total installs
0
this week
260
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
260
stars
Systematic PR preparation that validates tests and generates high-quality PR bodies.
Prepares contributions by analyzing the target repo's conventions, git history, test coverage, and generating properly-formatted PR bodies.
When to Use:
When NOT to Use:
-1. Prior Work Check -> BLOCKING: Final check for competing PRs
0. Isolation Check -> BLOCK if PR mixes unrelated changes
1. Context Discovery -> Understand target repo conventions
2. Git Archaeology -> Analyze commit patterns, PR history
3. Pre-Flight Checks -> Run tests, linting, build
4. Change Analysis -> Summarize what changed and why
4.5 Commit Split Advisor -> Suggest logical commit groups (manual)
5. PR Body Generation -> Create structured PR description
6. USER REVIEW GATE -> STOP. User must approve before submission.
7. Submission -> Only after explicit user approval
CRITICAL: Run this FIRST. Do not proceed if PR mixes unrelated changes.
# Extract commit type prefixes from branch
git log --oneline main..HEAD | sed 's/^[^ ]* //' | grep -oE '^[a-z]+(\([^)]+\))?:' | sort -u
Rule: If more than one commit type prefix exists, the PR is mixing concerns.
# List all files changed vs main
git diff --name-only main..HEAD
# Group by directory
git diff --name-only main..HEAD | cut -d'/' -f1-2 | sort -u
| Check | Pass Criteria |
|---|---|
| Single commit type | All commits share same prefix |
| Thematic files | All changed files relate to PR scope |
| No main overlap | Changes not already merged |
| Atomic scope | Can explain in one sentence |
DO NOT PROCEED IF ISOLATION CHECK FAILS.
NEVER submit a PR without explicit user approval.
After generating the PR body (Phase 5), ALWAYS:
gh pr create# Write PR body to file
cat > /tmp/pr-body.md << 'EOF'
<generated PR body>
EOF
# Show user
cat /tmp/pr-body.md
# ASK - do not proceed without answer
echo "Review complete. Submit this PR? [y/N]"
# Go projects
go build ./...
go vet ./...
go test ./... -v -count=1
# Node projects
npm run build
npm test
# Python projects
pytest -v
Analyze the branch diff and suggest logical commit groupings.
# Review the scope of changes
git diff --stat main..HEAD
Output a numbered list of suggested commits with file groups:
Commit 1: [description] -- files: path/a.go, path/a_test.go
Commit 2: [description] -- files: path/b.go, path/c.go
Ordering: Infrastructure/migrations > Models/services > Controllers/views > Tests > VERSION/CHANGELOG. Each commit must be independently valid (no broken imports). If diff is < 50 lines across < 4 files, recommend a single commit.
See references/commit-split-advisor.md for full rules.
These are suggestions only. User reads and implements manually.
## Summary
Brief description of WHAT changed and WHY. 1-3 sentences.
Start with action verb (Add, Fix, Update, Refactor).
## Changes
Technical details of what was modified.
## Test plan
- [x] `go build ./...` passes
- [x] `go test ./...` passes
- [x] Manual: <specific scenario tested>
Fixes #NNN
Key conventions:
[x] (you ran them before PR)Fixes #NNN goes at the end# Create PR with reviewed body
gh pr create --title "type(scope): brief description" \
--body "$(cat /tmp/pr-body.md)" \
--base main
Remember: This command should ONLY run after user explicitly approves.
| DON'T | DO INSTEAD |
|---|---|
| Submit without approval | ALWAYS stop for user review |
| Skip isolation check | Run Phase 0 FIRST |
| Bundle lint fixes into feature PRs | Lint fixes get their own PR |
| Giant PRs | Split into logical chunks |
| Vague PR body | Detailed summary with context |
| Skip pre-flight | Always run tests locally |
User says: "Prepare this branch for PR submission."
What happens:
User says: "Generate a high-quality PR description with clear verification steps."
What happens:
| Problem | Cause | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| PR body is weak | Missing context from commits/tests | Re-run evidence collection and expand summary |
| Submission blocked | Mandatory review gate not passed | Get explicit user approval before gh pr create |
| Test plan incomplete | Commands/results not captured | Add executed checks and outcomes explicitly |
| Title/body mismatch | Scope drift during edits | Regenerate from latest branch diff and constraints |
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
mattpocock/skills
parcadei/continuous-claude-v3
cursor/plugins
ailabs-393/ai-labs-claude-skills
pproenca/dot-skills
mattpocock/skills
Useful defaults in pr-prep — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: pr-prep is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
pr-prep is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
Registry listing for pr-prep matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
pr-prep has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: pr-prep is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
Keeps context tight: pr-prep is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
I recommend pr-prep for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
Registry listing for pr-prep matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
I recommend pr-prep for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
showing 1-10 of 67