Generate PR Description

You are tasked with generating a comprehensive pull request description following the repository's standard template.

Steps to follow:

1. Read the PR description template:

   • First, check if thoughts/shared/pr_description.md exists
   • If it doesn't exist, inform the user they need to create a PR description template at thoughts/shared/pr_description.md
   • Read the template carefully to understand all sections and requirements

2. Identify the PR to describe:

   • Check if the current branch has an associated PR: gh pr view --json url,number,title,state 2>/dev/null
   • If no PR exists for the current branch, or if on main/master, list open PRs: gh pr list --limit 10 --json number,title,headRefName,author
   • Ask the user which PR they want to describe

3. Check for existing description:

   • Check if thoughts/shared/prs/{number}_description.md already exists
   • If it exists, read it and inform the user you'll be updating it
   • Consider what has changed since the last description was written

4. Gather comprehensive PR information:

   • Get the full PR diff: gh pr diff {number}
   • If you get an error about no default remote repository, instruct the user to run gh repo set-default and select the appropriate repository
   • Get commit history: gh pr view {number} --json commits
   • Review the base branch: gh pr view {number} --json baseRefName
   • Get PR metadata: gh pr view {number} --json url,title,number,state

4b. Gather reasoning history (if available):

• Check if reasoning files exist: ls .git/claude/commits/*/reasoning.md 2>/dev/null
• If they exist, aggregate them: bash .claude/scripts/aggregate-reasoning.sh main
• This shows what approaches were tried before the final solution
• Save the output for inclusion in the PR description

1. Analyze the changes thoroughly: (ultrathink about the code changes, their architectural implications, and potential impacts)

   • Read through the entire diff carefully
   • For context, read any files that are referenced but not shown in the diff
   • Understand the purpose and impact of each change
   • Identify user-facing changes vs internal implementation details
   • Look for breaking changes or migration requirements

2. Handle verification requirements:

   • Look for any checklist items in the "How to verify it" section of the template
   • For each verification step:
     • If it's a command you can run (like make check test, npm test, etc.), run it
     • If it passes, mark the checkbox as checked: - [x]
     • If it fails, keep it unchecked and note what failed: - [ ] with explanation
     • If it requires manual testing (UI interactions, external services), leave unchecked and note for user
   • Document any verification steps you couldn't complete

3. Generate the description:

   • Fill out each section from the template thoroughly:
     • Answer each question/section based on your analysis
     • Be specific about problems solved and changes made
     • Focus on user impact where relevant
     • Include technical details in appropriate sections
     • Write a concise changelog entry
   • If reasoning files were found (from step 4b):
     • Add an "## Approaches Tried" section before "## How to verify it"
     • Include the aggregated reasoning showing failed attempts and what was learned
     • This helps reviewers understand the journey, not just the destination
   • Ensure all checklist items are addressed (checked or explained)

4. Save the description:

   • Write the completed description to thoughts/shared/prs/{number}_description.md
   • Show the user the generated description

5. Update the PR:

   • Update the PR description directly: gh pr edit {number} --body-file thoughts/shared/prs/{number}_description.md
   • Confirm the update was successful
   • If any verification steps remain unchecked, remind the user to complete them before merging

Important notes:

• This command works across different repositories - always read the local template
• Be thorough but concise - descriptions should be scannable
• Focus on the "why" as much as the "what"
• Include any breaking changes or migration notes prominently
• If the PR touches multiple components, organize the description accordingly
• Always attempt to run verification commands when possible
• Clearly communicate which verification steps need manual testing