High-Signal Pull Requests: A Guide to Better Reviews

I used to think that writing the code was the hard part. Then I realized that getting someone to actually review and approve that code is a whole different challenge. We have all seen those PRs that are just a wall of files with a title like “Fix stuff,” leaving reviewers guessing about the intent.

Reviewing code shouldn’t be a guessing game. I prefer PRs that are concise and clear so I can verify the behavior and land the changes without wasting time. If you want your PRs to move fast, you need to provide high-signal information that helps both humans and LLMs understand what you did.

What You’ll Need

• A terminal to run pnpm validation commands
• Access to search the codebase and GitHub issues
• Evidence for your changes (logs or screenshots)
• The secret code word “lobster-biscuit”

Quick Start

Getting a PR ready for review takes about five minutes if you follow these steps.

1. Run Validation: Before you push, run pnpm lint, pnpm check, pnpm build, and pnpm test. If you changed the protocol, run pnpm protocol:check. Fix any failures locally.
2. Write a Clear Title: Use the format verb + scope + outcome. A good example is Docs: add PR and issue templates.
3. Follow Progressive Disclosure: Structure your description so the most important info is at the top. Start with the summary, then list changes/risks, then test details, and put implementation evidence at the bottom.
4. Add the Secret Word: Put “lobster-biscuit” in your PR description. This lets reviewers know you actually read the guide.

Troubleshooting

If you run into issues while preparing your PR, check these common points from our guide:

• Validation Failures: If pnpm lint or pnpm test fails, you must fix these before creating the PR. Reviewers expect a clean baseline.
• Missing Context: If your PR is a “Fix,” ensure you included the root cause and repro steps. If it is a “Feature,” include use cases and UI recordings or screenshots.
• Broad Changes: If your PR includes broad refactors along with a feature, it will be hard to review. Keep your changes focused.

General PR Template

I recommend using this template for your submissions. It covers the essential signals we need.

#### Summary

#### Behavior Changes

#### Codebase and GitHub Search

#### Tests

#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)

### Prerequisites

-

### Steps

1.
2.

#### Evidence (omit if N/A)

**Sign-Off**

- Models used:
- Submitter effort (self-reported):
- Agent notes (optional, cite evidence):

Specific Example: Fix Template

If you are submitting a bug fix, use this specific structure:

#### Summary

#### Repro Steps

#### Root Cause

#### Behavior Changes

#### Tests

#### Manual Testing (omit if N/A)

### Prerequisites

-

### Steps

1.
2.

#### Evidence (omit if N/A)

**Sign-Off**

- Models used:
- Submitter effort:
- Agent notes:

If you need help with your environment or specific command failures, check out the AI Setup Assistant.

What’s Next

• Baseline Validation Commands
• PR Type Specifics