Pr Report

PR Report Generator

PublishedJun 17, 2026

Loading actions...

5 minBeginnerprompt8 files

Skill content

Main instructions and any bundled files for this skill.

markdown

Additional Files (7)

PR Report Generator

Generate comprehensive PR reports for openshift/hypershift, openshift-eng/ai-helpers, openshift/enhancements, and openshift/release repositories.

Usage

/pr-report                                    # Last 7 days (default)
/pr-report --start 2026-02-05                 # From date to today
/pr-report --start 2026-02-05 --end 2026-02-12  # Specific date range
/pr-report --start 2026-02-05 --end 2026-02-12 --deep  # With deep code analysis
/pr-report --start 2026-02-05 --end 2026-02-12 --deep --progress-report # Deep analysis + progress report
/pr-report --start 2026-02-05 --end 2026-02-12 --deep --breaking-changes # Deep analysis + breaking change report

Parameters:

--start (optional): Starting date in YYYY-MM-DD format (e.g., 2026-02-05). Defaults to 7 days ago.
--end (optional): Ending date in YYYY-MM-DD format (e.g., 2026-02-12). Defaults to today.
--deep (optional): Enable deep analysis mode that fetches and analyzes actual code diffs.
--progress-report (optional): Generate a narrative blog-style progress report (Dolphin Emulator style). Requires --deep.
--breaking-changes (optional): Generate a detailed breaking change assessment report for management cluster operators and senior SREs. Requires --deep.
--output-dir (optional): Directory for output files. If not specified, ask the user with AskUserQuestion.

What This Command Does

This command generates two reports (with two optional additions):

1. Fast Data Report (automated)

Fetches merged PRs from all repositories
Filters openshift/release PRs to only HyperShift-related paths
Filters openshift-eng/ai-helpers and openshift/enhancements PRs to HyperShift contributors
Queries Jira for ticket hierarchy (Epic, OCPSTRAT linkage)
Generates metrics (timing, reviewers, merge patterns)

2. Impact Analysis Report (LLM-generated)

Analyzes PR changes to assess actual impact
Groups work by themes and strategic initiatives
Provides context for project contributors and followers
Highlights notable changes, risks, and cross-repo dependencies

3. Deep Code Analysis (--deep mode only)

Fetches actual code diffs for selected PRs
Analyzes what the code actually changed (not just descriptions)
Identifies breaking changes, API modifications, test coverage
Verifies alignment between PR descriptions and actual changes

4. Progress Report (--progress-report, narrative blog post)

Narrative technical blog post in the style of Dolphin Emulator progress reports
Problem-first storytelling with technical depth
Credits contributors by GitHub handle
Thematic grouping of related changes

5. Breaking Change Report (--breaking-changes, SRE/management-oriented)

Identifies all PRs with breaking changes, API modifications, or behavioral shifts
Links each to Jira tickets with full hierarchy (ticket -> Epic -> OCPSTRAT)
Assesses impact scope per customer segment and usage pattern
Provides actionable recommendations (revert, fix, document, accept)
Written for management cluster operators and senior SREs

6. Collaboration Report (always generated with --deep)

Groups contributors into clusters based on review relationships and shared topics
Identifies bridge nodes who connect clusters
Super short format: one paragraph per cluster

Output Files

File	Description
`$OUTPUT_DIR/weekly_pr_report_fast.md`	Data-focused report with metrics and PR listings
`$OUTPUT_DIR/hypershift_pr_details_fast.json`	Raw PR data in JSON format
`$OUTPUT_DIR/hypershift_pr_summary.json`	Compact summary data for LLM analysis
`$OUTPUT_DIR/weekly_pr_report_impact.md`	LLM-generated impact analysis for contributors
`$OUTPUT_DIR/pr_scored.json`	(--score) Ranked PR list for deep analysis
`.work/pr_deep/*.json`	(--deep mode) Per-PR data with diffs for analysis
`.work/pr_deep/*_analysis.json`	(--deep mode) Per-PR analysis results
`.work/pr_deep_aggregated.json`	(--deep mode) Aggregated analysis findings
`$OUTPUT_DIR/hypershift_progress_report_YYYY-MM-DD.md`	(--progress-report) Narrative progress report (blog-style)
`$OUTPUT_DIR/breaking_changes_report_YYYY-MM-DD.md`	(--breaking-changes) Breaking change assessment for SREs
`$OUTPUT_DIR/collaboration_report_YYYY-MM-DD.md`	(--deep) Contributor collaboration clusters

Implementation

Step 0: Validate Arguments

If --progress-report is specified without --deep, stop and inform the user: --progress-report requires --deep mode for code-level analysis. Please add --deep to your command.

Step 1: Run the Python script to fetch PRs

Parse the arguments and run the script. The script accepts:

Positional since_date (start date)
--end flag for end date

# Parse ARGUMENTS which may contain: --start YYYY-MM-DD --end YYYY-MM-DD --deep --output-dir DIR
# Example: python3 contrib/repo_metrics/weekly_pr_report.py 2026-02-05 --end 2026-02-12 --output-dir /tmp

python3 contrib/repo_metrics/weekly_pr_report.py $ARGUMENTS --output-dir $OUTPUT_DIR

Note: The script's positional argument is the start date. The --start flag in the skill is mapped to this positional argument when invoking the script. $OUTPUT_DIR is the directory chosen by the user. All output file paths below use this directory.

Step 2: Jira Enrichment (Conditional)

Check the script output to determine if Jira data was fetched directly:

If script output shows "Fetching Jira data via REST API..." (JIRA_EMAIL + JIRA_TOKEN were set):

Jira hierarchy was populated automatically by the script
Skip to Step 3 (Impact Analysis Report)

If script output shows "JIRA_EMAIL/JIRA_TOKEN not set, loading from cache":

Extract unique tickets from PR data and query Jira using MCP tools
Use mcp__atlassian-mcp__jira_get_issue for EACH ticket (in parallel)
Fields to request: summary,description,parent,issuetype,customfield_10978,customfield_10979,customfield_10980,issuelinks,labels,priority,status
Key fields (Jira Cloud at redhat.atlassian.net):
- parent = native hierarchy field (includes key, summary, issuetype with hierarchyLevel)
- customfield_10978 = SFDC Cases Counter
- customfield_10979 = SFDC Cases Links
- customfield_10980 = SFDC Cases Open
Hierarchy: Walk the parent chain: Story/Bug (level 0) → Epic (level 1) → Feature (level 2, was OCPSTRAT)
Build hierarchy: ticket → Epic → Feature/OCPSTRAT
Save to $OUTPUT_DIR/jira_hierarchy.json
Re-run the Python script to regenerate report with enriched data

Step 3: Generate Impact Analysis Report

Read $OUTPUT_DIR/hypershift_pr_details_fast.json and $OUTPUT_DIR/jira_hierarchy.json, then generate a rich impact analysis report for project contributors and followers.

Write the report to $OUTPUT_DIR/weekly_pr_report_impact.md following this structure:

# HyperShift Weekly Impact Report

**Period:** YYYY-MM-DD to YYYY-MM-DD
**Audience:** Project contributors and followers

## Summary

[2-3 paragraphs summarizing the week's progress across all repositories. Highlight major themes,
significant changes, and overall project momentum. Write in a tone suitable for developers and
community members following the project.]

## Strategic Initiatives Progress

[For each OCPSTRAT initiative with activity this week, provide:]

### OCPSTRAT-XXXX: [Initiative Name]

**Status:** [Active development / Nearing completion / Maintenance]

**This Week's Progress:**
- [Bullet points describing meaningful progress, not just PR titles]
- [Focus on what capability was added/fixed and why it matters]

**PRs:** #XXX, #YYY, #ZZZ

---

## Repository Highlights

### openshift/hypershift

[Group PRs by theme and explain their collective impact:]

#### Platform Support
- **AWS:** [What changed and why it matters]
- **Azure/ARO:** [What changed and why it matters]
- **GCP:** [What changed and why it matters]
- **KubeVirt:** [What changed and why it matters]

#### Control Plane
[Significant changes to CPO, HO, or core controllers]

#### Bug Fixes
[Notable bugs resolved, grouped by severity/impact]

#### Testing &#x26; Quality
[Test improvements, CI fixes, coverage additions]

### openshift-eng/ai-helpers

[Summarize AI tooling improvements and their impact on developer workflow]

### openshift/release

[Summarize CI configuration changes grouped by category:]

#### CI Efficiency
[Job optimizations, resource adjustments]

#### Test Coverage
[New tests, validation improvements]

#### Automation
[Bot improvements, workflow automation]

---

## Notable PRs

[Deep-dive on 3-5 high-impact PRs, selected by highest importance score from the
`$OUTPUT_DIR/pr_scored.json` output (Jira priority, SDK/API changes, bug fixes,
manual CI work). For each:]

### PR #XXXX: [Title]

**Repository:** [repo]
**Author:** @username
**Why it matters:** [2-3 sentences explaining the actual impact of this change for users/developers]

**What changed:**
- [Technical summary of the key changes]
- [Any breaking changes or migration notes]

**Related:** [Links to related PRs, issues, or documentation]

---

## Risks &#x26; Breaking Changes

[List any changes that could affect users or downstream consumers:]

- **[Component]:** [Description of risk/change and mitigation]

## Dependencies &#x26; Cross-Repo Changes

[Highlight changes that span multiple repositories or require coordinated updates]

---

## Metrics Snapshot

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Total PRs merged | X |
| Unique contributors | X |
| Avg time to merge | X hours |
| Most active reviewer | @username (X PRs) |

## Coming Up

[If visible from PR descriptions or Jira tickets, mention work in progress or upcoming features]

Guidelines for Impact Analysis:

Audience is contributors and followers - Use technical language appropriate for developers, but explain the "why" not just the "what"
Assess actual impact by reading PR descriptions and understanding:
- What problem does this solve?
- Who benefits from this change?
- Does this enable new capabilities or fix broken functionality?
Group related work - Multiple PRs often contribute to one logical change; group them together
Highlight cross-repo dependencies - Changes in openshift/release often enable or support changes in hypershift
Be specific about platforms - HyperShift supports multiple platforms (AWS, Azure, GCP, KubeVirt, Agent); call out platform-specific work
Call out breaking changes - Any API changes, behavior changes, or deprecations should be prominently noted
Recognize contributors - Mention authors of significant work

Example Impact Transformations:

PR Title	Impact Analysis
"OCPBUGS-60707: Fix user-ca-bundle cleanup when additionalTrustBundle is removed"	Fixes a bug where custom CA certificates persisted in guest clusters after being removed from HostedCluster spec. Operators managing trust bundles will now see expected cleanup behavior.
"GCP-216: feat(nodepool): add GCP platform support"	Adds foundational NodePool support for GCP platform, enabling cluster autoscaling and machine management. This is a key milestone for GCP HyperShift availability.
"CNTRLPLANE-2082: hypershift: run conformance directly on the root cluster"	Simplifies CI architecture by running conformance tests on the management cluster instead of nested clusters. Reduces resource requirements and test complexity.

Step 4: Deep Code Analysis (--deep mode only)

If --deep flag is specified, perform deep code analysis after the standard report:

Step 4a: Interactive PR Selection

Present the user with PR selection options using AskUserQuestion:

Read $OUTPUT_DIR/hypershift_pr_details_fast.json and $OUTPUT_DIR/jira_hierarchy.json to categorize and score PRs.

Score each PR using these criteria (higher score = more important):

Criterion	Points	Description
Enhancement proposal	+200	openshift/enhancements PRs (always selected)
Jira Priority: Critical/Blocker	+100	Highest priority tickets
Jira Priority: Major	+50	Major priority tickets
Jira Priority: Normal	+20	Normal priority tickets
Jira Priority: Minor	+10	Minor priority tickets
SDK/API/Migration work	+30	Title contains "sdk", "migrate", "api", or "breaking"
Feature work	+15	Title contains "feat" or "feature"
Bug fix (OCPBUGS)	+10	Has OCPBUGS ticket reference
Has any Jira ticket	+5	Tracked work is more valuable
Manual CI change	+10	Non-bot author in openshift/release

To score PRs, join PR data with Jira hierarchy to get priority:

# Get priority for a ticket from jira_hierarchy.json
jq -r '."CNTRLPLANE-1708".priority' $OUTPUT_DIR/jira_hierarchy.json
# Returns: "Critical"

Ask user which PRs to analyze:

Options:
- "All PRs (X total)" - Analyze every PR
- "High-value selection (15-20 PRs)" - Auto-select top PRs by importance score
- "Bug fixes only (Z PRs)" - OCPBUGS tickets only
- "Custom selection" - Choose from annotated PR list

If "High-value selection", sort PRs by score descending and select top 15-20.

If "Custom selection", present an annotated PR list for user selection:

Display format (output as markdown table for readability):

## Select PRs for Deep Analysis

| # | Score | Priority | Repo | PR | Title | Topic |
|---|-------|----------|------|-----|-------|-------|
| 1 | 105 | Critical | hypershift | #7678 | CNTRLPLANE-2215: feat(aws): migrate S3 to AWS SDK v2 | SDK/API |
| 2 | 60 | Major | hypershift | #7634 | OCPBUGS-74931: Fix OCM config constant updates | bugfix |
| 3 | 55 | Major | release | #74707 | CNTRLPLANE-2082: run conformance on root cluster | CI |
| 4 | 35 | Normal | hypershift | #7658 | CNTRLPLANE-2675: move infrastructure reconciliation | feature |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

Topic categories (derive from title/labels):

SDK/API - SDK migrations, API changes
bugfix - OCPBUGS tickets
feature - New functionality
CI - CI/testing changes (release repo)
docs - Documentation
platform:{aws,azure,gcp,kubevirt} - Platform-specific
cleanup - Refactoring, maintenance

Then use AskUserQuestion with multiSelect to let user pick specific PRs by number.

Step 4b: Fetch Diffs

Build the PR list based on user selection and run the script with --deep:

# Build list of PRs in owner/repo#number format
# Example: openshift/hypershift#7709 openshift/release#74707

python3 contrib/repo_metrics/weekly_pr_report.py "$SINCE_DATE" \
    --deep openshift/hypershift#7709 openshift/hypershift#7613 ...

This creates per-PR JSON files in .work/pr_deep/ containing:

PR metadata (title, author, body, labels)
Jira hierarchy
Full diff content (file patches)

Step 4c: Analyze PRs with Task Agents

For each JSON file in .work/pr_deep/, spawn a Task agent to analyze:

List input files: ls .work/pr_deep/*.json | grep -v '_analysis.json'

Spawn Task agents in batches of 3-5 (parallel execution):

Task agent prompt:

Read .work/pr_deep/&#x3C;key>.json and analyze the PR diff.

IMPORTANT: Output the analysis JSON directly in your response text.
Do NOT attempt to write any files. Return the JSON between
```json and ``` markers so the parent can extract it.

CRITICAL: The PR author is in the "author" field of the input JSON.
Always use this exact value for attribution. Never guess the author
from the PR description or diff content.

Produce JSON with these fields:
{
  "repo": "&#x3C;repo>",
  "number": &#x3C;number>,
  "author": "&#x3C;author from input JSON>",
  "summary": "One sentence describing actual code changes",
  "actual_changes": ["Change 1", "Change 2", ...],
  "alignment_with_description": "matches" | "partial" | "misleading",
  "breaking_changes": ["Breaking change 1", ...] or [],
  "test_coverage": "Description of test changes" or "none",
  "api_changes": true | false,
  "files_changed": {"total": N, "by_type": {"go": X, "yaml": Y, ...}},
  "notable_observations": ["Observation 1", ...],
  "impact_level": "high" | "medium" | "low",
  "impact_statement": "One sentence business/user impact"
}

Focus on:
- What the code actually changes (not just the description)
- Any breaking changes to APIs or behavior
- Whether tests are added/modified appropriately
- Code quality patterns worth noting

After each Task agent completes, extract the JSON from the agent's response and write it to .work/pr_deep/<key>_analysis.json using the Write tool. The agent cannot write files itself.
Wait for batch completion, then launch next batch.

Step 4d: Aggregate Findings

After all agents complete, aggregate the analysis files:

Read all *_analysis.json files from .work/pr_deep/

Combine into .work/pr_deep_aggregated.json:

{
  "generated_at": "2026-02-12T15:30:00Z",
  "prs_analyzed": 15,
  "analyses": [ /* all analysis objects */ ],
  "summary": {
    "breaking_changes_count": 0,
    "api_changes_count": 2,
    "high_impact_count": 3
  }
}

Step 4e: Enhanced Impact Report

When generating $OUTPUT_DIR/weekly_pr_report_impact.md, incorporate deep findings:

Use actual_changes instead of PR descriptions for accuracy
Highlight any breaking_changes prominently
Note alignment_with_description issues (description vs reality)
Use impact_statement for Notable PRs section

Step 5: Generate Dolphin-style Progress Report (--progress-report mode only)

If --progress-report flag is specified, generate a narrative blog-post-style technical progress report. Write the report to $OUTPUT_DIR/hypershift_progress_report_YYYY-MM-DD.md where YYYY-MM-DD is the end date.

Data sources:

$OUTPUT_DIR/hypershift_pr_details_fast.json for PR data (including author field)
$OUTPUT_DIR/jira_hierarchy.json for strategic context
.work/pr_deep_aggregated.json and .work/pr_deep/*_analysis.json (if --deep mode)
$OUTPUT_DIR/weekly_pr_report_impact.md for the impact analysis already generated

CRITICAL: Author Attribution Always use the author field from the PR data JSON for contributor attribution. Never guess or infer authors from PR descriptions or code content.

Writing Style Guide:

Problem-first storytelling: Don't just say what changed -- explain the problem that existed before, why it mattered, and how the change addresses it. Give readers the "why" before the "what."
Conversational but authoritative tone: Write like a knowledgeable engineer explaining work to interested peers over coffee. Avoid marketing language and buzzwords. Be direct, specific, and occasionally witty.
Technical depth with accessibility: Go deep on the technical details -- show code patterns, explain algorithms, discuss trade-offs. But structure explanations so readers can follow even if they're not experts in that specific area.
Historical context: When relevant, explain what the previous approach was and why it's being changed. "The old emptyBucket function relied on X, which had problems Y and Z. The new approach does W instead."
Credit contributors by GitHub handle: Use @username format, sourced from the author field in the PR data JSON.
Thematic grouping over chronological listing: Group related changes into coherent narratives rather than listing PRs in order. A single section might cover 1-3 related PRs that tell one story.
Highlight interesting edge cases and trade-offs: Readers love learning about subtle problems -- TLS ServerName workarounds, race conditions, pre-stable dependencies. These are what make the report worth reading beyond just a changelog.
Don't cover everything: Select 5-8 of the most interesting/impactful changes for deep narrative treatment. Minor fixes and routine maintenance can be briefly mentioned or grouped into a "smaller changes" section at the end.

Structure Template:

# HyperShift Progress Report: [Month Day - Day, Year]

[Opening paragraph: 2-3 sentences setting the scene. Total PR count, major themes,
and one hook to draw readers in.]

---

## [Narrative Section Title]
**By @author -- [PR #XXXX](url)**

[3-8 paragraphs telling the story of this change. Start with the problem,
explain the approach, detail interesting technical aspects, note edge cases.]

---

## [Next Section...]
[Repeat for each major topic]

---

## Smaller Changes Worth Noting

[Brief mentions of other work that didn't warrant full sections but should
be acknowledged:]

- **[Title]** (@author, [PR #XXXX](url)): One-sentence description.
- ...

Step 5b: Generate Breaking Change Report (--breaking-changes mode only)

If --breaking-changes flag is specified, generate a detailed breaking change assessment report. Write the report to $OUTPUT_DIR/breaking_changes_report_YYYY-MM-DD.md where YYYY-MM-DD is the end date. Requires --deep mode because breaking change detection relies on code diff analysis.

If --breaking-changes is specified without --deep, stop and inform the user: --breaking-changes requires --deep mode for code-level analysis. Please add --deep to your command.

Data sources:

.work/pr_deep_aggregated.json for per-PR analysis including breaking_changes and api_changes fields
.work/pr_deep/*_analysis.json for detailed per-PR analysis
$OUTPUT_DIR/jira_hierarchy.json for Jira ticket hierarchy (ticket -> Epic -> OCPSTRAT)
$OUTPUT_DIR/hypershift_pr_details_fast.json for PR metadata and author information

Target audience: Management cluster operators and senior SREs who need to evaluate whether a HyperShift upgrade introduces changes that could affect their clusters, tenants, or operational procedures. Write with the assumption that the reader:

Manages one or more management clusters running HyperShift
May have downstream consumers embedding HyperShift API types
Operates hosted clusters across multiple platforms (AWS, Azure, GCP, KubeVirt)
Needs to assess upgrade risk for fleet-wide rollouts
Cares about N-1/N+1 version compatibility for rollback safety

Selection criteria: Include PRs that have ANY of:

Non-empty breaking_changes array in the deep analysis
api_changes: true in the deep analysis
Behavioral changes that alter observable semantics (condition status meanings, default values, serialization format, required fields, RBAC requirements, network policy changes)
Changes that could affect rolling upgrades or version skew scenarios

Report structure:

# HyperShift Breaking Change Assessment

**Period:** YYYY-MM-DD to YYYY-MM-DD
**Audience:** Management cluster operators, senior SREs, and platform engineering leads
**Generated from:** Deep analysis of N PRs with code diff inspection

## Executive Summary

[2-3 sentences: how many breaking/API changes were detected, overall risk level for upgrading,
and whether any changes require immediate action before upgrade.]

## Risk Matrix

| # | Severity | PR | Component | Change | Affected Consumers | Action Required |
|---|----------|----|-----------|--------|--------------------|--------------------|
| 1 | Critical/High/Medium/Low | [#XXXX](url) | component | Brief description | Who is affected | Revert/Fix/Document/Accept |

## Detailed Assessments

### BC-1: [Short descriptive title]

**PR:** [#XXXX](PR url) by @author
**Jira:** [TICKET-XXXX](jira url) -> Epic: [EPIC-XXXX](jira url) -> OCPSTRAT: [OCPSTRAT-XXXX](jira url)
**Merged:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Severity:** Critical | High | Medium | Low
**Type:** API field change | Behavioral change | Serialization change | Condition semantics | RBAC change | Network policy change

#### What Changed

[Precise technical description of the breaking change. Include code snippets or field names
where helpful. Explain both the old behavior and the new behavior.]

#### Impact Scope

**Directly affected:**
- [List specific consumer types: management cluster operators, downstream API consumers,
  CI/CD pipelines, monitoring/alerting, GitOps configurations, etc.]

**Platform scope:** [All platforms | AWS only | Azure/ARO only | GCP only | etc.]

**Version scope:**
- **Upgrading from:** [Which versions are affected when upgrading to this change]
- **Rolling back to:** [What happens if you need to roll back after this change]
- **N-1 compatibility:** [Is the change safe for mixed-version environments during rolling upgrades]

**Customer patterns at risk:**
- [Describe specific usage patterns that would break. E.g., "Customers using Karpenter with
  custom readiness gates that check Ready=True will need to update their gates to also handle
  the new VersionResolved condition."]
- [Be specific about fleet management, GitOps, external tooling, monitoring integrations]

#### Recommendation

**Action:** Revert | Fix to maintain compatibility | Document and accept | Accept with migration guide

**Rationale:** [Why this recommendation. Consider: Is the break intentional or accidental?
Is there a way to maintain backward compatibility? What is the cost of reverting vs. the
cost of the break? Is this a bug fix that intentionally changes behavior?]

**If accepting:**
- [ ] Update upgrade documentation / release notes
- [ ] Notify affected customers via [channel]
- [ ] Add migration steps to upgrade runbook
- [ ] Update monitoring/alerting for new behavior
- [ ] Verify rollback safety in staging

**If fixing:**
- [ ] Proposed fix: [Brief description of how to maintain compatibility]
- [ ] Target PR: [If a fix PR exists or should be created]

---

[Repeat for each breaking change]

## API Changes (Non-Breaking)

[List API changes that are additive/non-breaking but should be noted for awareness.
These don't require action but inform operators about new capabilities or fields
they may want to start using.]

| PR | Field/Type | Change | Notes |
|----|-----------|--------|-------|
| [#XXXX](url) | `HostedClusterStatus.controlPlaneVersion` | New field added | Enhancement proposal; implementation pending |

## Upgrade Safety Assessment

### Pre-Upgrade Checklist

Based on the breaking changes identified in this period, operators should verify the following
before upgrading:

- [ ] [Specific check derived from the breaking changes]
- [ ] [Another specific check]

### Rollback Considerations

[Summarize any changes that make rollback risky or require special procedures]

### Version Skew Notes

[Any notes about running mixed versions during a rolling upgrade window]

Severity classification:

Severity	Criteria
Critical	Data loss risk, cluster unavailability, or silent corruption. Requires immediate action.
High	Breaks existing integrations or operational procedures. Requires action before upgrade.
Medium	Changes observable behavior but has workarounds. Should be addressed in upgrade planning.
Low	Minor behavioral change unlikely to affect most operators. Document for awareness.

Step 5c: Generate Collaboration Report (always with --deep)

Generate a short collaboration report grouping contributors into clusters based on who reviews whom and who works on the same topics. Write to $OUTPUT_DIR/collaboration_report_YYYY-MM-DD.md.

Data sources:

$OUTPUT_DIR/hypershift_pr_details_fast.json for reviewer and author relationships
.work/pr_deep/*_analysis.json for topic/component grouping

Format: Keep it super short -- one paragraph per cluster, plus a closing line identifying bridge nodes (people who connect clusters).

How to identify clusters:

Build a graph of author <-> reviewer relationships from PR data
Group contributors who frequently review each other or work on the same component/topic
Name each cluster by its primary focus area (e.g., "OADP & Envtest", "Karpenter / AutoNode")
List the members in bold, then one sentence describing what they worked on together
End with a "Bridge nodes" line identifying contributors who span multiple clusters

Step 6: Present Results

After generating reports, provide the user with:

A brief summary of what was generated
Location of all report files
Key highlights from the impact analysis
(--deep mode) Summary of deep analysis findings (the script prints a summary table with PR count, files, lines changed, and vendor files skipped)
(--progress-report mode) Mention the progress report location
(--breaking-changes mode) Summarize breaking changes found and their severity
(--deep mode) Mention the collaboration report location

Script Features

The Python script uses:

GitHub Contributors API to fetch HyperShift contributors
GitHub GraphQL API with search queries for efficient PR fetching (merged:START..END range syntax)
File path filtering for openshift/release (only PRs touching hypershift paths)
Parallel async API calls with aiohttp for maximum performance
Jira hierarchy caching (loads from previous run if available)
PR scoring for deep analysis (--score flag) with priority-based ranking
Conventional commit parsing for topic extraction

Scoring Command

Use --score to output a ranked list of PRs for deep analysis selection:

python3 contrib/repo_metrics/weekly_pr_report.py 2026-02-05 --end 2026-02-12 --score
python3 contrib/repo_metrics/weekly_pr_report.py 2026-02-05 --end 2026-02-12 --score --score-limit 30

Output includes:

Scored PRs table with priority, repo, topic, and title
JSON file at $OUTPUT_DIR/pr_scored.json for programmatic use
Ready-to-use PR list for --deep flag

Notes

Requires aiohttp Python package: pip install aiohttp
Falls back to synchronous mode if aiohttp is not available (slower but functional)

Jira Integration Modes

Mode 1: Direct API (Recommended)

Set JIRA_EMAIL and JIRA_TOKEN environment variables for Jira Cloud
JIRA_EMAIL: Your Red Hat email address (Atlassian account)
JIRA_TOKEN: Jira Cloud API token (generate at https://id.atlassian.com/manage-profile/security/api-tokens)
Script fetches Jira data directly via REST API v3 with batch queries
No MCP tool calls needed - fully automated
Example: export JIRA_EMAIL="[email protected]" JIRA_TOKEN="your-api-token"

Mode 2: MCP Fallback (Interactive use)

When JIRA_EMAIL/JIRA_TOKEN are not set, script outputs ticket list only
Claude uses MCP tools (mcp__atlassian-mcp__jira_get_issue) to fetch hierarchy
Requires Jira MCP server to be configured

Environment Variables

Variable	Required	Description
`JIRA_EMAIL`	No	Atlassian account email (enables direct API mode with JIRA_TOKEN)
`JIRA_TOKEN`	No	Jira Cloud API token (requires JIRA_EMAIL)
`JIRA_URL`	No	Jira Cloud URL (defaults to `https://redhat.atlassian.net`)
`GITHUB_TOKEN`	No	GitHub token (falls back to `gh auth token` if not set)

Contents

View Original Source

Related Skills

General

PromptBeginner5 minmarkdown

Untitled Skill

193

Jan 12, 2026

General

PromptBeginner5 minmarkdown

Frontend Typescript Linting.mdc

TypeScript and ESLint rules that MUST be followed when creating, modifying, or reviewing any file under apps/frontend/, including .ts, .tsx, .js, and .jsx files. Also apply when discussing frontend li...

160

Feb 15, 2026

General

PromptBeginner5 minmarkdown

2. Apply Deepthink Protocol (reason about dependencies

risks

127

Jan 15, 2026