Create Pull Request

Creates GitHub PRs with titles that pass n8n's check-pr-title CI validation.

PR Title Format

<type>(<scope>): <summary>

Types (required)

Scopes (optional but recommended)

• API - Public API changes
• ai-builder - AI Workflow Builder and Instance AI
• benchmark - Benchmark CLI changes
• core - Core/backend/private API
• editor - Editor UI changes
• engine - New workflow execution engine v2 (@n8n/engine package & engine-v2 module in cli)
• * Node - Specific node (e.g., Slack Node, GitHub Node)

check-pr-title accepts only these scopes. Do not use a package or folder name as the scope (for example instance-ai, cli, evals or docker). If no scope fits, omit the scope. To give two scopes, separate them with a comma and a space: fix(core, editor): ....

Summary Rules

• Use imperative present tense: "Add" not "Added"
• Capitalize first letter
• No period at the end
• No ticket IDs (e.g., N8N-1234)
• Add (no-changelog) suffix to exclude from changelog, unless the type already excludes it

Steps

1. Check current state:

   git status
   git diff --stat
   git log origin/master..HEAD --oneline
   

   Copy

2. Check for implementation plan: Look for a plan file in the repository plan directories (.claude/plans/ or .agents/plans/ when present) that matches the current branch's ticket ID (e.g. if branch is scdekov/PAY-1234-some-feature, check for PAY-1234.md). If a plan file exists, ask the user whether they want to include it in the PR description as a collapsible <details> section (see Plan Section below). Only include the plan if the user explicitly approves.

3. If this is a security fix, audit every public-facing artifact before proceeding (see Security Fixes below).

4. Analyze changes to determine:

   • Type: What kind of change is this?
   • Scope: Which scope from the Scopes list fits? Omit the scope if none fits.
   • Summary: What does the change do? Start it with a capital letter.

5. Push branch if needed:

   git push -u origin HEAD
   

   Copy

6. Create PR using gh CLI. Read .github/pull_request_template.md as the body structure, then populate each section with actual content before creating the PR:

   • Summary: describe what the PR does
   • Why: explain why the change is needed (see Why below)
   • How to test: describe how to test the changes. Include an example workflow if appropriate
   • Related tickets: add the Linear ticket URL (https://linear.app/n8n/issue/[TICKET-ID]) and any GitHub issue links
   • Checklist: keep as-is from the template
     • Add a "🤖 PR Summary generated by AI" at the end of the body

   Before you create the PR, proofread the body with these checks. Rewrite each sentence that fails a check:

   1. The Summary and the Why together are under the word budget. If not, first remove the details that the reviewer reads in the diff, then shorten the Why.
   2. Each sentence names who does what: a component, a process, or a person as the subject, with a plain technical verb.
   3. Each domain term has a plain definition where it first appears.
   4. Each sentence is true for the diff.

   When a later commit changes a fact in the body, update the body.

   gh pr create --draft --title "<type>(<scope>): <summary>" --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
   <populated body based on pull_request_template.md>
   EOF
   )"
   

   Copy

PR Body Guidelines

Based on .github/pull_request_template.md:

Write for a reviewer who does not know this area of the code. The reviewer must understand the change before they open the diff. Use ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English: short sentences, active voice.

1. Keep the Summary and the Why together under about 200 words. A small PR needs much less.
2. Define each domain term in plain words where it first appears. Do not use a ticket ID or an internal name as an explanation.
3. Leave out details that the reviewer reads in the diff: error cases, status codes, renamed fields, the order of calls, file lists, test names. Mention one only when it changes behaviour that a reviewer could miss. Also leave out what reviewers already know (framework behaviour).
4. Use plain technical verbs, not metaphors ("passes the value", not "hands the value" or "lets the value through").

Summary: what the PR does

1. Start with one to three sentences of background for a reader who is new to the area. Then state what the PR does.
2. Write prose about behaviour, not a list of code edits. Name a class or a function when it represents an essential/core concept and it helps the reader to navigate the change.
3. If the PR changes no product code, say so in the first sentence (for example: "This PR only adds tests.").
4. Do not justify the change here. The justification goes in the Why.
5. Include screenshots or videos for UI changes.

Why: the reasoning

Always fill the ## Why section. The Summary and the core of the Why are what the reviewer needs most. Keep the core short:

1. Do not repeat the Summary.
2. State the problem or the constraint that makes the pre-existing code unfit.
3. If there are accepted gaps, or changes for existing code paths, state them in a separate short paragraph.

Add rejected alternatives only when a reviewer would otherwise ask about them, if any. Use one or two sentences for each alternative: state the concrete reason it fails. Write an alternative that was never built in the conditional. Together, the alternatives must be shorter than the core Why section.

How to test Section

• Explain how to test the changes
• Include an example workflow if appropriate
• If the feature is gated in a default n8n instance (requires a non-default module via N8N_ENABLED_MODULES, an enterprise license, a feature flag, or similar), note which env vars/license are needed so the tester can deploy a correctly configured instance

Related Links Section

• Link to Linear ticket: https://linear.app/n8n/issue/[TICKET-ID]
• Link to GitHub issues using keywords to auto-close:
  • closes #123 / fixes #123 / resolves #123
• Link to Community forum posts if applicable

Checklist

All items should be addressed before merging:

• The human author of the PR has checked the "I have seen this code, I have run this code, and I take responsibility for this code." checkbox
• PR title follows conventions
• Docs updated or follow-up ticket created
• Tests included (bugs need regression tests, features need coverage)
• release/backport label added if urgent fix needs backporting

Examples

Feature in editor

feat(editor): Add workflow performance metrics display

Bug fix in core

fix(core): Resolve memory leak in execution engine

Node-specific change

fix(Slack Node): Handle rate limiting in message send

Breaking change (add exclamation mark before colon)

feat(API)!: Remove deprecated v1 endpoints

No changelog entry

feat(core): Experimental feature not enabled yet (no-changelog)

No scope (affects multiple areas)

chore: Update dependencies to latest versions

Validation

The PR title must match this pattern:

^(feat|fix|perf|test|docs|refactor|build|ci|chore|revert)(\((API|core|editor|benchmark|ai-builder|engine|[A-Za-z0-9 .]+ Node)(, (API|core|editor|benchmark|ai-builder|engine|[A-Za-z0-9 .]+ Node))*\))?!?: [A-Z].+[^.]$

Key validation rules:

• Type must be one of the allowed types
• Scope is optional, but if present it must be in parentheses and in the Scopes list (or <display name> Node)
• Exclamation mark for breaking changes goes before the colon
• Summary must start with capital letter
• Summary must not start with a past-tense verb (Added)
• Summary must not end with a period
• No ticket number (N8N-1234) and no PR number (#12345)
• (no-changelog), if used, must be the last part of the summary

Check the title against these rules before you run gh pr create. The two most frequent failures are a package name as the scope and a lowercase first letter in the summary.

Plan Section

If a matching plan file was found in a repository plan directory and the user has approved including it, add a collapsible section at the end of the PR body (after the checklist, before EOF):

<details>
<summary>Implementation plan</summary>

<!-- paste plan file contents here -->

</details>

Security Fixes

This repo is public. Never expose the attack vector in any public artifact. Describe what the code does, not what threat it prevents.

Before pushing a security fix, verify: no branch name, commit, PR title, PR body, Linear URL, test name, or code comment hints at the vulnerability.

When in doubt, check the Linear issue for possible extra precautions