Create a PR template

Add a pull request template that reviewers and integrators can use. The template must include a short summary, the linked issue number, testing steps, a checklist of CI and code review items, and a place to note any breaking changes. Put it in the repository so every new PR uses it by default.

Before I commit the PR template, surface the things that speed approval. Put the test instructions at the top, call out the minimum reviewer count, and include a template checklist for security and performance considerations. Flag language that causes hesitation, such as unspecified migrations or undocumented public API changes, so authors will fix them before requesting review.

Someone just opened a sizeable feature PR linking no issue and with no test steps. I’m torn between requesting a rewrite and trying to triage it as-is. I don’t know how urgent the feature is to the author or whether they can split it. Should I ask for tests and a split plan now, or start a limited review to salvage parts? What preserves momentum and keeps the repo healthy?

We keep wasting reviewers’ time on PRs that lack testing instructions, checklist items, or clear scope. That slows merges and frustrates reviewers. Which habit change would yield the biggest improvement — requiring a filled PR template before asking for review, training frequent contributors on expectations, or adding a pre-review bot to block missing items? Recommend one change and how to implement it with minimal friction.