I got a PR to review recently. Large diff, AI-assisted, touching a module three other features depended on. The description was one sentence. It named the file, not the reason.
I spent fifteen minutes just mapping the change before I could start reviewing. What the intent was. Where the risk was. Which files mattered and which were noise.
Somewhere in the middle of that fifteen minutes, I thought: I have done this to someone else.
The author forgets what the reviewer does not know
When you write the code, you carry everything.
You know why the module was split. You know what you tried before landing here. You know which section you shipped with a quiet doubt. You know the edge case that is technically handled but not properly tested.
Then you open the PR.
And you write the description from that place. From inside the full context, for the version of you who already knows. Not for the reviewer who is about to walk in without any of it.
"Refactored service layer."
"
Discussion
Take the lead—comment now
Lead the way—your insights can inspire others.