Finalizes any PR for merge by verifying title and description match actual implementation. Reviews existing description quality before suggesting changes. Use when asked to "finalize PR", "check PR description", "review commit message", before merging any PR, or when PR implementation changed during review. Do NOT use for extracting lessons (use learn-from-pr), writing tests (use write-tests-agent), or investigating build failures (use pr-build-status).
Quick Install
bunx add-skill dotnet/maui -s pr-finalize
androiddesktopdotnethacktoberfestiosmaccatalyst
Instructions
Loadingβ¦
PR Finalize
Ensures PR title and description accurately reflect the implementation for a good commit message.
Standalone skill - Can be used on any PR, not just PRs created by the pr agent.
Core Principle: Preserve Quality
Review existing description BEFORE suggesting changes. Many PR authors write excellent, detailed descriptions. Your job is to:
Evaluate first - Is the existing description good? Better than a template?
Preserve quality - Don't replace a thorough description with a generic template
Enhance, don't replace - Add missing required elements (NOTE block, issue links) without rewriting good content
Only rewrite if needed - When description is stale, inaccurate, or missing key information
Usage
# Get current state (no local checkout required)
gh pr view XXXXX --json title,body
gh pr view XXXXX --json files --jq '.files[].path'
# Review commit messages (helpful for squash/merge commit quality)
gh pr view XXXXX --json commits --jq '.commits[].messageHeadline'
# Review actual code changes
gh pr diff XXXXX
# Optional: if the PR branch is checked out locally
git diff origin/main...HEAD
Evaluation Workflow
Step 1: Review Existing Description Quality
Before suggesting changes, evaluate the current description:
Quality Indicator
Look For
Structure
Clear sections, headers, organized flow
Technical depth
File-by-file changes, specific code references
Scanability
Easy to find what changed and where
Accuracy
Matches actual diff - not stale or incorrect
Completeness
Platforms, breaking changes, testing info
Step 2: Compare to Template
Ask: "Is the existing description better than what my template would produce?"
If YES: Keep existing, only add missing required elements
If NO: Suggest improvements or replacement
Step 3: Produce Output
Recommended PR title (if change needed)
Assessment of existing description
Specific additions needed (e.g., "Add NOTE block at top")
Only full replacement if description is inadequate
Title Requirements
The title becomes the commit message headline. Make it searchable and informative.
Requirement
Good
Bad
Platform prefix (if specific)
[iOS] Fix Shell back button
Fix Shell back button
Describes behavior, not issue
[iOS] SafeArea: Return Empty for non-ISafeAreaView views
Fix #23892
Captures the "what"
Return Empty for non-ISafeAreaView
Fix SafeArea bug
Notes model change if applicable
(opt-in model)
(omitted)
No noise prefixes
[iOS] Fix...
[PR agent] Fix...
Title Formula
[Platform] Component: What changed (model change if any)
Examples:
[iOS] SafeArea: Return Empty for non-ISafeAreaView views (opt-in model)
[Android] CollectionView: Fix scroll position reset on item update
[Windows] Shell: Use NavigationView instead of custom flyout
Description Requirements
PR description should:
Start with the required NOTE block (so users can test PR artifacts)
Include the base sections from .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md ("Description of Change" and "Issues Fixed"). The skill adds additional structured fields (Root cause, Fix, Key insight, etc.) as recommended enhancements for better agent context.
Match the actual implementation
<!-- Please let the below note in for people that find this PR -->
> [!NOTE]
> Are you waiting for the changes in this PR to be merged?
> It would be very helpful if you could [test the resulting artifacts](https://github.com/dotnet/maui/wiki/Testing-PR-Builds) from this PR and let us know in a comment if this change resolves your issue. Thank you!
### Description of Change
[Must match actual implementation]
### Issues Fixed
Fixes #XXXXX
Content for Future Agents
The title and description become the commit message. Future agents searching git history will use this to understand:
What changed and why
What patterns to follow or avoid
How this change affects related code
Required Elements for Agent Success
Element
Purpose
Example
Root cause
Why the bug occurred
"Non-ISafeAreaView views falling through to return baseSafeArea"
Fix approach
What the code now does
"Return SafeAreaPadding.Empty for views without interface"
Philosophy/model change
If behavior model changed
"Before: opt-out. After: opt-in via interface"
Key interfaces/types
Types agents need to know
"ISafeAreaView, ISafeAreaView2 = opt-in contract"
What NOT to do
Failed approaches to avoid
"Don't use Element type in Platform layer"
Architectural constraints
Layer boundaries, type availability
"Platform layer cannot reference Controls types"
Edge cases
Known limitations or risks
"Legacy layouts are [Obsolete], custom views need interface"
"What NOT to Do" Section (Critical)
When try-fix or debugging revealed failed approaches, document them:
### What NOT to Do (for future agents)
- β **Don't use [Type] in [Layer]** - [Why it fails]
- β **Don't use [Pattern]** - [Why it's brittle/wrong]
- β **Don't [Approach]** - [Why it doesn't work]
This prevents future agents from repeating failed experiments.
Philosophy/Model Changes
When a fix changes the behavioral model (not just fixing a bug), call it out explicitly:
**This is a philosophy change:**
- **Before:** [Old behavior model]
- **After:** [New behavior model]
Example: "Before: Safe area applied by default (opt-out). After: Only views implementing ISafeAreaView get safe area (opt-in)."
Use structured template only when existing description is inadequate:
<!-- Please let the below note in for people that find this PR -->
> [!NOTE]
> Are you waiting for the changes in this PR to be merged?
> It would be very helpful if you could [test the resulting artifacts](https://github.com/dotnet/maui/wiki/Testing-PR-Builds) from this PR and let us know in a comment if this change resolves your issue. Thank you!
### Root Cause
[Why the bug occurred - be specific about the code path]
### Description of Change
[What the code now does]
**This is a philosophy change:** (if applicable)
- **Before:** [Old model]
- **After:** [New model]
[Cross-platform alignment notes if relevant]
### Key Technical Details
**[Relevant interfaces/types]:**
- `InterfaceA` - [What it does]
- `InterfaceB` - [What it does]
**[Category] that [work/don't work]:**
- List of types/views affected
### What NOT to Do (for future agents)
- β **Don't [approach 1]** - [Why it fails]
- β **Don't [approach 2]** - [Why it's wrong]
- β **Don't [approach 3]** - [Constraint that prevents it]
### Edge Cases
| Scenario | Risk | Mitigation |
|----------|------|------------|
| [Case 1] | Low/Medium/High | [How to handle] |
| [Case 2] | Low/Medium/High | [How to handle] |
### Issues Fixed
Fixes #XXXXX
### Platforms Tested
- [x] iOS
- [x] Android
- [ ] Windows
- [ ] Mac
Quality Comparison Examples
Good Existing Description (KEEP)
## Changes Made
### 1. **PickerHandler.iOS.cs** - MacCatalyst-specific improvements
#### Added UIAlertController instance field
- Declared `UIAlertController? pickerController` as instance field...
#### Improved picker dismiss logic
- Moved picker dismiss logic from event handler to "Done" button action
- Removed `EditingDidEnd` event handler causing duplicate dismiss calls
## Platforms Affected
- **MacCatalyst** (primary)
- iOS (no behavior changes, shared code)
## Breaking Changes
None
Verdict: Excellent - file-by-file breakdown, specific changes, platforms, breaking changes. Keep it.
Poor Existing Description (REWRITE)
Fixed the issue mentioned in #30897
Verdict: Inadequate - no detail on what changed. Use template.
Complete Example
See references/complete-example.md for a full agent-optimized PR description showing all elements above applied to a real SafeArea fix.
