liveBook · Manning

Title-driven review

As explained in "Looks Good to Me"

A review approach in which the pull request title provides enough context for a reviewer to understand what is being reviewed.

Title-driven review makes a pull request understandable before the reviewer opens its description. A strong title distills the change, establishes the right review mindset, and reduces questions that create cognitive overhead. section 2.3.1

From vague to useful

“bug fix for invoice issue” identifies only a broad category and leaves urgency, scope, and the exact problem unclear. A reviewer may need to search for context before knowing what to examine. The description and tags can add the why, but they should remain optional for basic understanding. section 2.3.1

Use titles that:

  • State the change in a concise, self-explanatory line. section 2.3.1
  • Reserve descriptions and tags for additional context, especially the reason behind the change. section 2.3.1

How "Looks Good to Me" covers it

How deep it goes
Explains the principle through a vague title and categorization examples, but stops short of a complete title-writing procedure.
Examples
Uses “bug fix for invoice issue” and feat:/fix: prefix examples to contrast vague and informative titles.
What you can do after
Apply title prefixes and concise wording to make pull requests understandable before reviewers read additional details.
How it connects
Connects pull-request titles with descriptions, tags, code review, categorization prefixes, and cognitive overhead.

Related concepts

This explainer was generated by Manning's knowledge graph from the text of "Looks Good to Me". The section links point to the parts of the book it draws on.