JasonWarrenUK Assess whether this branch is ready to be submitted as a reviewable pull request. Three layers: the mechanical facts, the gate run and the same review methodology pr-review applies after the PR exists. Anything that would surface in the PR review should surface here, one step earlier.
Step 0: Facts
Gather the exact numbers first: "$HOME"/.claude/library/scripts/branch-facts.sh $base (blank $base = the script's default, main) emits JSON (ahead/behind, conventional-commit and branch-name compliance, WIP commits, diff size, conflict markers, TODOs and console.logs added, test files touched, svu bump). Judge from these facts; the steps below are the judgement layer, not fact-gathering to repeat by hand.
Step 1: Run the gate
Discover the project's test, typecheck and lint commands from package.json (or the ecosystem equivalent) and run all three. This is the one check only a local checkout can perform, the whole reason to review before the PR instead of after, so never skip it or substitute a static skim of test files. Distinguish failures the branch caused from pre-existing breakage (run the same check on the base branch when unclear); pre-existing breakage is reported, never blamed on this branch.
Step 2: Review the code with pr-review's methodology
Load the pr-review-dry_run skill and run its full methodology against this branch: foci (correctness, security, conventions, reinforcement), taxonomy (🔴/🟠/🟡/🟣), scope classification and its conventions-research step (CLAUDE.md, .claude/**/*, docs/). The local diff git diff <base>...HEAD (the same $base, default main) substitutes for its gh pr diff step; everything else applies unchanged.
Do not re-derive or abbreviate that methodology here. A thinner duplicate of it is exactly what this skill used to carry, and it routinely missed what the PR review then caught: structured per-focus passes find what "check for obvious bugs" skims past.
One addition the diff alone can't show: for every changed export, function signature or component prop, Grep for its callers and confirm they still hold. Changed-contract breakage lives outside the diff.
Step 3: Branch mechanics
From the Step 0 facts, briefly:
- Conventional-commit compliance, atomicity, no WIP/fixup/junk commits
- Branch name:
<prefix>/<short-description>, prefix from the canonical set (matches CLAUDE.md §8.6):feat,fix,enhance,refactor,test,docs,config,chore,ci,deps,hotfix,spike,agents; breaking-change branches use<prefix>/breaking-<description>
Step 4: Breaking changes
- Removed or renamed exports, functions, types or components
- Changed function signatures (required parameters added/reordered)
- Modified return types in a widening direction
- Database schema changes (columns removed/renamed, constraints changed)
- HTTP API changes (routes, methods, request/response shapes)
- New required environment variables
- Changed component props (removed, renamed, type-changed, newly required)
Verdict: defined, not vibed
| Verdict | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Blocked | Unresolved conflict markers, or a red gate that predates the branch (needs a human call before any PR makes sense) |
| Needs Work | Any 🔴 finding, a red gate this branch caused, or WIP/fixup commits |
| Ready | Green gate and nothing above 🟠/🟡; remaining findings are listed as improvements, not blockers |
Output Format
Verdict
Ready | Needs Work | Blocked, with the one-line reason from the mapping above.
Gate
Test / typecheck / lint results, and whether any failure predates the branch.
Findings
The Step 2 findings in taxonomy order, file and line references included. Omit if none.
Branch Health
Branch name compliance, commit message quality, commit atomicity.
Breaking Changes
Any detected, with context. Flag format:
⚠️ Breaking change: consider
feat!:orBREAKING CHANGE:footer
Omit if none.
Recommended Next Steps
Ordered list: blockers first, then improvements, then nice-to-haves.
If the verdict is Ready, offer to run the pr-create skill immediately, forwarding base <branch> when $base isn't main so the PR opens as a stacked layer on the same base this review judged, rather than silently targeting main.