Skip to content

docs: tighten changeset description guidance in AGENTS.md#1833

Merged
pranaygp merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
docs/changeset-description-guidance
Apr 30, 2026
Merged

docs: tighten changeset description guidance in AGENTS.md#1833
pranaygp merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
docs/changeset-description-guidance

Conversation

@TooTallNate
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@TooTallNate TooTallNate commented Apr 23, 2026

Summary

  • Specify that changeset descriptions should be one sentence, or two at most
  • Remove the redundant "BREAKING CHANGE" marker guidance since breaking changes are already communicated via the major semver bump

@TooTallNate
docs: tighten changeset description guidance in AGENTS.md
0dc81fc 
Specify that changeset descriptions should be one sentence (two at
most), and remove the redundant BREAKING CHANGE marker guidance since
breaking changes are already communicated via the major semver bump.
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 23, 2026 06:18
@changeset-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

changeset-bot Bot commented Apr 23, 2026 •
edited
Loading

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 46fecf5

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

@vercel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

vercel Bot commented Apr 23, 2026 •
edited
Loading

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
example-nextjs-workflow-turbopack Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
example-nextjs-workflow-webpack Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
example-workflow Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workbench-astro-workflow Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workbench-express-workflow Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workbench-fastify-workflow Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workbench-hono-workflow Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workbench-nitro-workflow Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workbench-nuxt-workflow Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workbench-sveltekit-workflow Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workbench-vite-workflow Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workflow-docs Ready Ready Preview, Comment, Open in v0 Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workflow-swc-playground Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am
workflow-web Ready Ready Preview, Comment Apr 30, 2026 7:37am

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Apr 23, 2026 •
edited
Loading

📊 Benchmark Results

📈 Comparing against baseline from main branch. Green 🟢 = faster, Red 🔺 = slower.

workflow with no steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
💻 Local 🥇 Nitro 0.037s (-13.9% 🟢) 1.004s (~) 0.967s 10 1.00x
💻 Local Express 0.041s (-6.5% 🟢) 1.005s (~) 0.963s 10 1.12x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 0.062s (-35.1% 🟢) 1.010s (-3.1%) 0.948s 10 1.67x
🐘 Postgres Express 0.063s (+8.1% 🔺) 1.011s (~) 0.948s 10 1.69x
workflow with 1 step

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
💻 Local 🥇 Nitro 1.102s (-2.6%) 2.004s (~) 0.903s 10 1.00x
💻 Local Express 1.133s (+0.6%) 2.006s (~) 0.873s 10 1.03x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 1.143s (~) 2.009s (~) 0.866s 10 1.04x
🐘 Postgres Express 1.147s (~) 2.010s (~) 0.863s 10 1.04x
workflow with 10 sequential steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
💻 Local 🥇 Nitro 10.766s (-1.6%) 11.021s (~) 0.255s 3 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 10.901s (~) 11.021s (~) 0.120s 3 1.01x
🐘 Postgres Express 10.943s (~) 11.024s (~) 0.081s 3 1.02x
💻 Local Express 10.958s (~) 11.023s (~) 0.064s 3 1.02x
workflow with 25 sequential steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 14.559s (~) 15.027s (~) 0.468s 4 1.00x
💻 Local Nitro 14.574s (-3.2%) 15.028s (-6.3% 🟢) 0.454s 4 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 14.588s (~) 15.026s (~) 0.438s 4 1.00x
💻 Local Express 14.968s (~) 15.029s (~) 0.061s 4 1.03x
workflow with 50 sequential steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 13.976s (~) 14.449s (-1.0%) 0.473s 7 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 14.288s (+2.3%) 15.026s (+5.0% 🔺) 0.738s 6 1.02x
💻 Local Nitro 15.268s (-9.0% 🟢) 16.028s (-5.9% 🟢) 0.760s 6 1.09x
💻 Local Express 16.408s (-1.2%) 17.031s (~) 0.623s 6 1.17x
Promise.all with 10 concurrent steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 1.255s (~) 2.010s (~) 0.754s 15 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 1.292s (+1.4%) 2.010s (~) 0.717s 15 1.03x
💻 Local Nitro 1.426s (-12.6% 🟢) 2.005s (-3.3%) 0.579s 15 1.14x
💻 Local Express 1.521s (+2.2%) 2.006s (~) 0.485s 15 1.21x
Promise.all with 25 concurrent steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 2.332s (-1.2%) 3.008s (~) 0.676s 10 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 2.389s (+1.6%) 3.012s (~) 0.623s 10 1.02x
💻 Local Nitro 2.555s (-18.7% 🟢) 3.008s (-22.6% 🟢) 0.453s 10 1.10x
💻 Local Express 2.745s (-7.0% 🟢) 3.007s (-12.9% 🟢) 0.262s 10 1.18x
Promise.all with 50 concurrent steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 3.466s (-0.6%) 4.010s (~) 0.543s 8 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 3.496s (~) 4.009s (~) 0.513s 8 1.01x
💻 Local Nitro 6.026s (-27.8% 🟢) 6.815s (-24.5% 🟢) 0.788s 5 1.74x
💻 Local Express 7.502s (-10.0% 🟢) 8.021s (-11.1% 🟢) 0.519s 4 2.16x
Promise.race with 10 concurrent steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 1.255s (~) 2.008s (~) 0.753s 15 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 1.280s (+1.9%) 2.008s (~) 0.727s 15 1.02x
💻 Local Express 1.600s (-15.5% 🟢) 2.006s (-15.1% 🟢) 0.405s 15 1.28x
💻 Local Nitro 1.828s (-2.0%) 2.391s (+2.1%) 0.562s 13 1.46x
Promise.race with 25 concurrent steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 2.323s (-0.8%) 3.010s (~) 0.688s 10 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 2.338s (~) 3.011s (~) 0.673s 10 1.01x
💻 Local Nitro 2.476s (-19.2% 🟢) 3.017s (-22.4% 🟢) 0.541s 10 1.07x
💻 Local Express 2.819s (-10.0% 🟢) 3.007s (-20.1% 🟢) 0.188s 10 1.21x
Promise.race with 50 concurrent steps

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Nitro 3.473s (~) 4.012s (~) 0.539s 8 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Express 3.501s (~) 4.011s (~) 0.510s 8 1.01x
💻 Local Nitro 7.056s (-22.8% 🟢) 7.787s (-22.3% 🟢) 0.730s 4 2.03x
💻 Local Express 7.960s (-9.5% 🟢) 8.523s (-8.1% 🟢) 0.562s 4 2.29x
workflow with 10 sequential data payload steps (10KB)

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 0.815s (-2.8%) 1.006s (-1.7%) 0.191s 60 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 0.822s (~) 1.006s (~) 0.184s 60 1.01x
💻 Local Nitro 0.854s (-12.9% 🟢) 1.038s (-5.1% 🟢) 0.184s 58 1.05x
💻 Local Express 1.030s (+4.7%) 1.611s (+49.7% 🔺) 0.580s 38 1.26x
workflow with 25 sequential data payload steps (10KB)

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 1.913s (-3.2%) 2.123s (-6.0% 🟢) 0.210s 43 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 1.969s (+2.2%) 2.307s (+9.9% 🔺) 0.338s 40 1.03x
💻 Local Nitro 2.621s (-13.7% 🟢) 3.111s (-17.2% 🟢) 0.490s 29 1.37x
💻 Local Express 3.072s (+1.9%) 4.009s (+11.8% 🔺) 0.937s 23 1.61x
workflow with 50 sequential data payload steps (10KB)

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 3.899s (-2.3%) 4.076s (-6.7% 🟢) 0.177s 30 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 4.042s (-1.5%) 4.781s (+3.8%) 0.739s 26 1.04x
💻 Local Nitro 7.562s (-18.7% 🟢) 8.080s (-19.4% 🟢) 0.519s 15 1.94x
💻 Local Express 8.912s (-3.2%) 9.325s (-6.9% 🟢) 0.413s 13 2.29x
workflow with 10 concurrent data payload steps (10KB)

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 0.288s (+2.1%) 1.007s (~) 0.718s 60 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 0.290s (+2.4%) 1.007s (~) 0.717s 60 1.01x
💻 Local Nitro 0.535s (-11.5% 🟢) 1.023s (~) 0.488s 59 1.86x
💻 Local Express 0.555s (-0.9%) 1.004s (~) 0.449s 60 1.93x
workflow with 25 concurrent data payload steps (10KB)

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Nitro 0.492s (-0.9%) 1.007s (~) 0.515s 90 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Express 0.497s (-2.6%) 1.006s (~) 0.510s 90 1.01x
💻 Local Nitro 2.097s (-17.4% 🟢) 2.888s (-4.0%) 0.792s 32 4.26x
💻 Local Express 2.437s (-3.0%) 3.009s (~) 0.572s 30 4.95x
workflow with 50 concurrent data payload steps (10KB)

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 0.788s (-3.7%) 1.007s (-1.0%) 0.219s 120 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 0.797s (+0.8%) 1.016s (+0.9%) 0.220s 119 1.01x
💻 Local Nitro 9.207s (-17.7% 🟢) 9.945s (-14.7% 🟢) 0.738s 13 11.68x
💻 Local Express 10.639s (-4.9%) 11.027s (-7.7% 🟢) 0.388s 11 13.50x
Stream Benchmarks (includes TTFB metrics)
workflow with stream

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time TTFB Slurp Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 0.203s (-1.1%) 1.000s (~) 0.001s (-12.5% 🟢) 1.011s (~) 0.808s 10 1.00x
💻 Local Express 0.209s (+4.9%) 1.004s (~) 0.010s (-18.2% 🟢) 1.016s (~) 0.807s 10 1.03x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 0.210s (+2.3%) 1.000s (~) 0.001s (-26.7% 🟢) 1.010s (~) 0.800s 10 1.03x
💻 Local Nitro 0.213s (~) 1.004s (~) 0.008s (-39.2% 🟢) 1.013s (-0.6%) 0.800s 10 1.05x
stream pipeline with 5 transform steps (1MB)

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time TTFB Slurp Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 0.607s (-3.7%) 1.004s (~) 0.004s (+3.1%) 1.021s (~) 0.415s 59 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 0.627s (~) 1.007s (~) 0.004s (-10.2% 🟢) 1.021s (~) 0.394s 59 1.03x
💻 Local Nitro 0.660s (-21.3% 🟢) 1.010s (~) 0.010s (+3.5%) 1.022s (-8.5% 🟢) 0.362s 59 1.09x
💻 Local Express 0.855s (+13.0% 🔺) 1.012s (-1.6%) 0.009s (-7.1% 🟢) 1.116s (+7.3% 🔺) 0.261s 54 1.41x
10 parallel streams (1MB each)

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time TTFB Slurp Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Nitro 0.941s (-2.9%) 1.240s (-0.6%) 0.000s (-51.0% 🟢) 1.254s (~) 0.313s 49 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Express 0.965s (~) 1.211s (-5.2% 🟢) 0.000s (-8.0% 🟢) 1.228s (-6.0% 🟢) 0.264s 50 1.03x
💻 Local Nitro 1.070s (-12.5% 🟢) 1.865s (-7.7% 🟢) 0.000s (+293.9% 🔺) 1.866s (-7.7% 🟢) 0.796s 33 1.14x
💻 Local Express 1.214s (-0.9%) 2.021s (~) 0.000s (-20.0% 🟢) 2.023s (~) 0.809s 30 1.29x
fan-out fan-in 10 streams (1MB each)

💻 Local Development

World Framework Workflow Time TTFB Slurp Wall Time Overhead Samples vs Fastest
🐘 Postgres 🥇 Express 1.727s (-2.6%) 2.064s (-5.2% 🟢) 0.000s (+Infinity% 🔺) 2.081s (-5.4% 🟢) 0.354s 29 1.00x
🐘 Postgres Nitro 1.774s (-1.0%) 2.137s (~) 0.000s (+93.1% 🔺) 2.148s (-1.2%) 0.375s 29 1.03x
💻 Local Nitro 3.314s (-2.2%) 3.593s (-10.9% 🟢) 0.000s (-29.7% 🟢) 3.908s (-3.2%) 0.594s 16 1.92x
💻 Local Express 3.675s (+6.0% 🔺) 4.035s (~) 0.001s (-28.6% 🟢) 4.395s (+8.9% 🔺) 0.720s 14 2.13x

Summary

Fastest Framework by World

Winner determined by most benchmark wins

World 🥇 Fastest Framework Wins
💻 Local Nitro 19/21
🐘 Postgres Express 15/21
Fastest World by Framework

Winner determined by most benchmark wins

Framework 🥇 Fastest World Wins
Express 🐘 Postgres 19/21
Nitro 🐘 Postgres 17/21
Column Definitions
  • Workflow Time: Runtime reported by workflow (completedAt - createdAt) - primary metric
  • TTFB: Time to First Byte - time from workflow start until first stream byte received (stream benchmarks only)
  • Slurp: Time from first byte to complete stream consumption (stream benchmarks only)
  • Wall Time: Total testbench time (trigger workflow + poll for result)
  • Overhead: Testbench overhead (Wall Time - Workflow Time)
  • Samples: Number of benchmark iterations run
  • vs Fastest: How much slower compared to the fastest configuration for this benchmark

Worlds:

  • 💻 Local: In-memory filesystem world (local development)
  • 🐘 Postgres: PostgreSQL database world (local development)
  • ▲ Vercel: Vercel production/preview deployment
  • 🌐 Turso: Community world (local development)
  • 🌐 MongoDB: Community world (local development)
  • 🌐 Redis: Community world (local development)
  • 🌐 Jazz: Community world (local development)

📋 View full workflow run

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Apr 23, 2026 •
edited
Loading

🧪 E2E Test Results

✅ All tests passed

Summary

Passed Failed Skipped Total
✅ ▲ Vercel Production 989 0 67 1056
✅ 💻 Local Development 1066 0 86 1152
✅ 📦 Local Production 1066 0 86 1152
✅ 🐘 Local Postgres 1066 0 86 1152
✅ 🪟 Windows 96 0 0 96
✅ 📋 Other 270 0 18 288
Total 4553 0 343 4896

Details by Category

✅ ▲ Vercel Production
App Passed Failed Skipped
✅ astro 89 0 7
✅ example 89 0 7
✅ express 89 0 7
✅ fastify 89 0 7
✅ hono 89 0 7
✅ nextjs-turbopack 94 0 2
✅ nextjs-webpack 94 0 2
✅ nitro 89 0 7
✅ nuxt 89 0 7
✅ sveltekit 89 0 7
✅ vite 89 0 7
✅ 💻 Local Development
App Passed Failed Skipped
✅ astro-stable 90 0 6
✅ express-stable 90 0 6
✅ fastify-stable 90 0 6
✅ hono-stable 90 0 6
✅ nextjs-turbopack-canary 77 0 19
✅ nextjs-turbopack-stable 96 0 0
✅ nextjs-webpack-canary 77 0 19
✅ nextjs-webpack-stable 96 0 0
✅ nitro-stable 90 0 6
✅ nuxt-stable 90 0 6
✅ sveltekit-stable 90 0 6
✅ vite-stable 90 0 6
✅ 📦 Local Production
App Passed Failed Skipped
✅ astro-stable 90 0 6
✅ express-stable 90 0 6
✅ fastify-stable 90 0 6
✅ hono-stable 90 0 6
✅ nextjs-turbopack-canary 77 0 19
✅ nextjs-turbopack-stable 96 0 0
✅ nextjs-webpack-canary 77 0 19
✅ nextjs-webpack-stable 96 0 0
✅ nitro-stable 90 0 6
✅ nuxt-stable 90 0 6
✅ sveltekit-stable 90 0 6
✅ vite-stable 90 0 6
✅ 🐘 Local Postgres
App Passed Failed Skipped
✅ astro-stable 90 0 6
✅ express-stable 90 0 6
✅ fastify-stable 90 0 6
✅ hono-stable 90 0 6
✅ nextjs-turbopack-canary 77 0 19
✅ nextjs-turbopack-stable 96 0 0
✅ nextjs-webpack-canary 77 0 19
✅ nextjs-webpack-stable 96 0 0
✅ nitro-stable 90 0 6
✅ nuxt-stable 90 0 6
✅ sveltekit-stable 90 0 6
✅ vite-stable 90 0 6
✅ 🪟 Windows
App Passed Failed Skipped
✅ nextjs-turbopack 96 0 0
✅ 📋 Other
App Passed Failed Skipped
✅ e2e-local-dev-nest-stable 90 0 6
✅ e2e-local-postgres-nest-stable 90 0 6
✅ e2e-local-prod-nest-stable 90 0 6

📋 View full workflow run

@TooTallNate TooTallNate mentioned this pull request Apr 23, 2026
Closed
8 tasks
Copilot AI reviewed Apr 23, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Updates contributor guidance in AGENTS.md to make changeset descriptions more concise and to simplify breaking-change signaling in changesets.

Changes:

  • Tighten changeset description guidance to one sentence (two max).
  • Remove guidance about adding a **BREAKING CHANGE** marker in changeset descriptions.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Comment thread AGENTS.md Outdated
Comment thread AGENTS.md Outdated
@TooTallNate
docs: address Copilot review feedback
2a69d08 
- Align command reference to `pnpm changeset add` (matching line 188)
- Drop the "see existing changesets for examples" parenthetical since
  existing changesets predate the new sentence-limit guidance
@pranaygp pranaygp enabled auto-merge (squash) April 24, 2026 01:11
@pranaygp pranaygp merged commit 59ec398 into main Apr 30, 2026
99 of 102 checks passed
@pranaygp pranaygp deleted the docs/changeset-description-guidance branch April 30, 2026 07:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code review Copilot Copilot left review comments

@pranaygp pranaygp pranaygp approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@TooTallNate @pranaygp