docs(pr-template): move Assumptions Made above User Flow

Co-Authored-By: Claude Code <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Kerry Lu 2026-09-11 17:28:55 -07:00
parent f77c8feb84
commit 6882811cf6

View file

@ -2,6 +2,23 @@
everyday engineering language, extremely parsable and readable at a glance. This goes double for
the TLDR, User Flow, and Caveats sections -->
## Assumptions Made
<!-- One bullet per claim this PR relies on that you did not actually test, each written as the claim
followed by what breaks if it turns out to be wrong. Write it for a reviewer who wants to attack
the weakest one, not to reassure them
Anything that narrows the scope of a bug belongs here unless you ran the test that proves it:
"only reproduces with X on", "no user-observable behavior difference", "this path is debug-only",
"no caller passes that shape". A claim you did verify is not an assumption; put the proof in
Screenshots / Proof of Fix instead
If the linked issue or ticket recorded something as untested or unverified, carry it into this
section or say here which run closed it out. Do not drop it silently
Example:
- The alert path is debug-only, so the growth cannot be hit at default log level. If a second
caller stringifies the same structure without a level gate, this ships the bug to every
deployment. Not tested: no run with the debug flag off
Write "None" if the change rests on nothing untested -->
## TLDR
<!-- Fill in the bullets below and keep each one short and concrete: one line per bullet, roughly 10 words max -->
@ -129,23 +146,6 @@ If you're seeing a delay in your PR being merged, ping the LiteLLM Team on [Slac
human reader
Leave this section empty if there are none -->
## Assumptions Made
<!-- One bullet per claim this PR relies on that you did not actually test, each written as the claim
followed by what breaks if it turns out to be wrong. Write it for a reviewer who wants to attack
the weakest one, not to reassure them
Anything that narrows the scope of a bug belongs here unless you ran the test that proves it:
"only reproduces with X on", "no user-observable behavior difference", "this path is debug-only",
"no caller passes that shape". A claim you did verify is not an assumption; put the proof in
Screenshots / Proof of Fix instead
If the linked issue or ticket recorded something as untested or unverified, carry it into this
section or say here which run closed it out. Do not drop it silently
Example:
- The alert path is debug-only, so the growth cannot be hit at default log level. If a second
caller stringifies the same structure without a level gate, this ships the bug to every
deployment. Not tested: no run with the debug flag off
Write "None" if the change rests on nothing untested -->
## QA runbook
<!-- Only needed when your PR edits tests/e2e; delete this section otherwise