Outcome
A reviewer should find the result, design boundary, highest-risk review questions, and evidence without wading through repeated headings or metadata checklists.
Scope
- Replace the current PR template with four focused sections: Outcome, Design and boundaries, Review focus, Evidence and remaining gates.
- Keep the existing knowledge-sharing and GitHub metadata contract, but scale narrative depth to risk and manage metadata in GitHub.
- Document the change in
docs/backlog/pr-review-quality.md and align the PR writing guide.
Acceptance
- Template still prompts for issue/backlog links, close/reference semantics, trust/failure/persistence where relevant, ordered code map, concrete review prompts, and residual gates.
- Documentation explicitly distinguishes required information from required headings.
- No product/runtime behavior changes.
Out of scope: rewriting historical PR descriptions or automating metadata checks.
Outcome
A reviewer should find the result, design boundary, highest-risk review questions, and evidence without wading through repeated headings or metadata checklists.
Scope
docs/backlog/pr-review-quality.mdand align the PR writing guide.Acceptance
Out of scope: rewriting historical PR descriptions or automating metadata checks.