Managing Git Workflow

Standardize git workflow for HASH development, ensuring traceability between code changes and Linear issues.

Branch Naming

Format: <shortname>/h-XXXX-description

• shortname: Developer identifier (first initial, nickname, etc.)
• h-XXXX: Linear ticket number (lowercase 'h')
• description: Brief kebab-case description

Examples:

• t/h-4892-support-baseurl-and-version-filter
• alice/h-1234-add-user-authentication
• bob/h-5678-fix-database-connection

Why this matters:

• Links code changes to Linear issues
• Enables progress tracking on tickets
• Maintains clear development history

Pull Request Creation

PR Title Format

Format: H-XXXX: Description

• Use uppercase 'H' in PR titles (unlike branch names)
• Keep description clear and concise

Examples:

• H-4922: Add branch naming instructions
• H-1234: Implement user authentication system
• H-5678: Fix database connection timeout

PR Template

Use the template at .github/pull_request_template.md. Key sections:

1. Purpose - High-level explanation of what and why
2. Related links - Linear issues, discussions, context
3. What does this change? - Specific implementation details
4. Pre-merge checklist:
   • Publishable library changes (npm/Cargo)
   • Documentation requirements
   • Turbo Graph impact
5. Known issues - Intentional omissions or limitations
6. Next steps - Planned follow-ups
7. Tests - Automated test coverage
8. How to test - Manual testing instructions
9. Demo - Screenshots or videos

Merge Queue

hashintel/hash merges through a GitHub merge queue. This changes both how a PR is enqueued and how that can be verified.

auto_merge is not evidence

Enqueuing a PR ("Merge when ready") does not populate the PR's auto_merge field — it stays null even on a completely successful enqueue. Never verify an enqueue by reading auto_merge: it reads null in the success case and the failure case alike, so it carries no information.

Verified 2026-07-31 on PR #9127: a human's successful enqueue at 14:07:40Z produced no auto_merge_enabled event and no auto_merge value — indistinguishable from a "failed" one.

Verifying an enqueue

Use either:

• a recent added_to_merge_queue event in GET /repos/hashintel/hash/issues/<NUMBER>/timeline
• fresh merge_group workflow runs on a gh-readonly-queue/<base>/pr-<NUMBER>-<sha> ref

Re-queuing after an ejection

Re-queuing works from agent sessions via the GitHub MCP enable_pr_auto_merge tool. Its response is success-shaped with an empty method and enabled at — that empty shape is the expected signature of the repo routing to the queue instead of creating an autoMergeRequest, not a failure. (Verified on #9127: added_to_merge_queue by claude[bot] at 14:29:23Z, merge_group CI restarted 23s later, merged unattended at 14:48:59Z with merged_by: claude[bot], no human action.)

What does not work:

• GraphQL enablePullRequestAutoMerge via curl — proxy-blocked in agent sessions ("only the pinned set of PR-review operations is served")
• REST PUT /repos/hashintel/hash/pulls/<NUMBER>/merge — rejected for queue-protected branches, and it would bypass the queue rather than enter it

Diagnosing an ejection

An ejection can be another PR's fault, or nobody's:

• The gh-readonly-queue/... ref names every PR in the batch. If only yours is named, it was not batched with another.
• Before treating an ejection as a defect in your diff, compare the failing step against the same step on the identical head in the PR-level run. A step that took 17 seconds there and timed out in the queue is infrastructure, not code. Do not push a "fix" for a flake.

The queue lints differently from the PR

The PR runs cargo clippy --all-features; the merge queue runs cargo hack --optional-deps --feature-powerset clippy, dispatched on GITHUB_EVENT_NAME in the .justfile. turbo.json also puts GITHUB_EVENT_NAME in the lint:clippy task's env, so the queue cannot replay the PR's cache. The queue can therefore legitimately surface feature-conditional problems the PR lint never ran — including the package-level warning: unused dependency gate that lint.yml greps for and fails on.

Before reporting a failure

Do not tell a human you were unable to do something without verifying that claim first, and re-check current state before asking them to do something you already attempted.

PR Review Process

Step 1: Gather Information

Run these commands to get full context:

# View PR metadata, description, and comments
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --comments

# View ALL changes (do not truncate)
gh pr diff <PR_NUMBER>

# View inline diff comments
gh api \
  -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json" \
  -H "X-GitHub-Api-Version: 2022-11-28" \
  /repos/hashintel/hash/pulls/<PR_NUMBER>/comments

Important: Always view the FULL diff. Do not pipe into head or use --name-only.

Step 2: Check Linear Issues

Look for H-XXXX references in the PR title/description, then fetch the issue:

# If Linear MCP is configured:
mcp__linear__get_issue --issueId "H-XXXX"

# Or use Linear web UI

Use the Linear issue requirements as baseline for the review.

Step 3: Provide Feedback

• Be precise about issue locations (file:line)
• Include suggestions for improvement
• Reference relevant code standards
• Distinguish blocking issues from suggestions

Quick Reference

Action	Format
Branch name	<shortname>/h-XXXX-description
PR title	H-XXXX: Description
View PR	gh pr view <NUMBER> --comments
View diff	gh pr diff <NUMBER>
View comments	gh api /repos/hashintel/hash/pulls/<NUMBER>/comments