Repository navigation
docs: focus PR descriptions on decisions and review risk - #241
Merged
Merged
Conversation
knzeng-e
added
documentation
knzeng-e
marked this pull request as ready for review
October 4, 2026 20:11
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Outcome
PR descriptions currently repeat the same flow across architecture, implementation, and tradeoff sections. This change gives reviewers a compact decision guide while preserving the knowledge-sharing contract. Closes #240. Scope:
docs/backlog/pr-review-quality.md.Design and boundaries
The template now has four visible sections: outcome, design/boundaries, review focus, and evidence/remaining gates. The writing guide makes required information distinct from required headings; money, trust, and deployment changes still need their full boundaries. GitHub metadata remains mandatory but moves out of the reviewer-facing narrative. This changes documentation only, not product behavior or CI policy. The alternative was to keep every existing section and shorten its prompt, but that would preserve the repeated reading path.
Review focus
.github/pull_request_template.md: Can a small change stay brief without allowing a high-risk change to omit its trust and failure model?docs/explanation/pull-requests-as-knowledge-sharing.md: Does the four-section story retain the existing review and metadata contract?docs/backlog/pr-review-quality.md: Is the scope narrow enough for this process change?Evidence and remaining gates
git diff --checkpasses. All nine required CI jobs pass, including Playwright. Manual diff review confirms no runtime files changed.