Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to AgentSystemLabs/nebula. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AgentSystemLabs/nebula/main/.claude/skills/pr-description/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AgentSystemLabs/nebulaWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/agentsystemlabs/nebula/pr-description)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/agentsystemlabs/nebula/pr-description"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agentsystemlabs/nebula/pr-description/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/agentsystemlabs/nebula/pr-description"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agentsystemlabs/nebula/pr-description.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00125 | $0.03931 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00050 | $0.01572 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00786 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00393 |
Grade A, and why
pr-description scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 231 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
A PR description is read three times: by the reviewer deciding whether to open the diff, by the person six weeks later asking why the code looks like this, and by whoever searches the merged PRs for the why behind a change. Write for all three: high level first, a picture before a paragraph, the mechanism at the bottom where only the reviewer scrolls.
This skill produces the body. The title follows the commit-subject rule: what a user now gets, not what the diff did ("Workspaces as a top tab bar, and one nebula instance per checkout", never "feat(tui): add tabs").
What every PR body carries — no exceptions
- A table of contents at the top, one link per
##section, so the reader clicks straight to the part they want. GitHub gives a PR body's headings no anchors of their own, so every linked heading ends with<a id="…"></a>and the link names that id with GitHub's prefix,#user-content-…— see GitHub anchors below; a dead TOC is worse than none. - Screenshots of the change. A TUI change without a picture is a claim. At least one PNG of the
screen after the change; a before/after pair when the change replaces something. Captured with
the SCREENSHOT HARNESS, hosted on the
pr-assetsbranch (recipe below). A change with no screen (a daemon mechanism, a CLI flag) shows its terminal output in a fenced block and a diagram, and says why there is no screenshot. - A mermaid diagram of the change, in a
```mermaidfence — GitHub renders it inline. Draw the change, not the whole system: the new flow, the state that moved, the crates touched.flowchart,sequenceDiagramandstateDiagram-v2cover nearly every PR here; the templates show which fits which shape. - Categories a reader can scan. Benefit groups (
🚀 Launch faster,🔔 Know when it's done) or change classes (✨ Feature · 🐛 Fix · 📝 Docs · 🧪 Tests · ♻️ Refactor) — one emoji per heading, never on the bullets. A fix files under the feature whose promise it keeps. Inside a section a bullet is a bold hook and a dash, then two to four indented sub-bullets of one fact each — the key or command in backticks, a setting in theSettings › Sessions › done_soundform, a behaviour — never a paragraph (2026-09-05: PR #30's first cut could not be glanced through). When the change touches something the user likes, one bullet says what stayed the same. Credit contributors inline:Thanks @handle (#NN).No file paths, symbols or line numbers above the technical overview. - A technical overview section, last before the notes, for the reviewer: the mechanism in a
few sentences, the files that matter with a clause each, the rejected approach they would ask
about, the gate ("
make cigreen: fmt, clippy, 687 tests"). Everything above it stays high level. - A risk section, directly above the technical overview: the author's own read of what merging
could break, in the PR REVIEWER SKILL's order — 🔒 security and production-merge risk, ⚡ performance
cost, 🧩 fit with the codebase's patterns — one table row each, rated Low / Medium / High with a
one-clause why, a 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 verdict above the table, and a Rollback line saying what a
git revertundoes and what it does not (a PROTOCOL VERSION bump, a migrated store, a pushed branch). "No risk" is never bare: a docs-only or prose-only PR says why nothing runs. The reviewer checks this read against the diff, so write it as the reviewer would, not as the seller. When the change adds a surface — the DAEMON execs a program, opens a socket, a route or aClientRequest, reads a new config source, writes a file it did not before — the Risk section opens with an### 🎯 Attack surfacesubsection above the verdict: one bullet per way in, saying who or what reaches it, what holds it, and what does not. The 🔒 row then rates the residue, not the whole list. One table cell is never enough for an exec surface (PR #42, 2026-09-09: the exec of a git-config path shipped as one cell, and the maintainer asked where the attack vectors were). The templates carry the block behind a guidance comment; a PR that adds no surface deletes it. - The footer. Every PR body ends with the line the harness gives you (currently
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)plus the session link) — keep it verbatim, last, after a blank line.
What ships with it
10 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
- templates/01-benefit-groups.md 4.4 KB
- templates/02-before-after.md 4.0 KB
- templates/03-category-table.md 4.5 KB
- templates/04-story.md 3.7 KB
- templates/05-release-note.md 4.0 KB
- templates/06-user-journey.md 4.1 KB
- templates/07-collapsible.md 4.2 KB
- templates/08-bug-fix.md 4.0 KB
- templates/09-scorecard.md 4.2 KB
- templates/10-crate-map.md 4.1 KB
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago Changed 36aad09d2e9a
- 1mo ago Changed · +7 lines d2071cdcc4a6
- 1mo ago Changed · -4 lines scan B → A ca4cfefa92bf
- 1mo ago First seen · 228 lines · 125 tokens per session scan B 0068d030a577
pr-description is a skill published in the GitHub repository AgentSystemLabs/nebula (271 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 125 tokens to every session and 3,931 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-06.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…