3-6 Generating PR Descriptions with Cursor

This article is part of our comprehensive Cursor workflow series for engineers.

You've just spent three hours implementing a complex feature. Your commits are clean, your code works, and you're ready to create a pull request. Then you stare at the empty PR description box, cursor blinking mockingly at you.

What do you write? "Fixed the thing" doesn't quite capture the nuanced architectural decisions you made. "Added feature X" tells your teammates nothing about why you built it this way or what they should pay attention to during review.

Sound familiar? You know a good PR description matters. But writing one properly takes time you don't have.

In our previous article, we showed how Cursor can generate meaningful commit messages. Now let's tackle the next step: turning those commits into PR descriptions that actually help your team.

Why PR Descriptions Matter (And Why We Avoid Writing Them)

Here's the truth: most developers write terrible PR descriptions because good ones are hard work. A proper PR description should answer three questions:

• Why was this change needed?
• What exactly changed?
• How should reviewers test it?

When you manually write this information, you're essentially doing archaeology on your own code. You dig through commits, remember the context, explain architectural decisions, and document test scenarios. It's tedious, but it's also essential.

Instead of your teammate spending 20 minutes figuring out what your code does, they can focus on whether it does it well.

The Template That Actually Works

Before we dive into automation, let's establish what a good PR description looks like. Here's the template we recommend:

## Background (Why)

<!-- Describe the context. Why was this PR needed? What problem does it solve? -->

## Implementation Approach (How)

<!-- Describe the implementation method and architectural decisions made. -->

## Actual Changes (What)

<!-- Highlight the main changes implemented in this merge request. Specifically explain what you changed and why. -->

- [ ] Feature/Change 1
- [ ] Feature/Change 2

### Screenshots or Video References

<!-- If applicable, add design references (links), screenshots, or screen recordings -->

### Testing Validation

<!-- List validated test cases. Include edge cases. -->

- [ ] Test scenario 1
- [ ] Test scenario 2
- [ ] Test scenario 3

<!-- Add any additional testing notes for reviewers -->

## Additional Notes

<!-- Any information helpful to PR reviewers (e.g., known limitations, future TODOs) -->

## Related Links

<!-- Links related to this PR -->

This template works because it mirrors how developers actually think about code changes. But filling it out manually? That's where the friction comes in.

Automating PR Descriptions with Cursor

Here's where Cursor transforms a 10-minute chore into a 30-second task.

Open Cursor's chat panel with Command + L (not Command + I—we want to generate text, not modify files directly). The key is using Cursor's @Git context feature.

When you type @Git, Cursor shows several options:

• PR Diff with Main Branch - Shows all changes compared to your main branch
• Specific commits - Lets you select individual commits for the PR

Let's say you want to generate a PR description for your last two commits. Here's what you do:

1. Type @Git and select the relevant commits
2. Add this prompt: "Generate a PR description using the PR template for these commits"
3. Hit enter

Cursor analyzes your code changes and generates a complete PR description following the template structure. It infers the purpose from your changes, explains the implementation approach, lists specific modifications, and even suggests test scenarios.

What used to take 10 minutes of manual writing now happens in under a minute. More importantly, Cursor doesn't just save time—it often catches details you might have forgotten to mention.

The Compound Benefits

Good PR descriptions don't just make code review easier—they compound over time. When a new developer joins your team and wants to understand how a feature evolved, they can read through PR history and get the full context.

When you're debugging an issue six months later, a well-written PR description tells you not just what changed, but why it changed and what the original author was thinking.

This is why we recommend using Cursor for PR generation. It's not just about saving time today—it's about building a more maintainable codebase for tomorrow.

The best part? Once you've set up this workflow, writing comprehensive PR descriptions becomes the default, not the exception. Your team's code review process improves, and your future self will thank you.

Support ExplainThis

If you found this content valuable, please consider supporting our work with a one-time donation of whatever amount feels right to you through this Buy Me a Coffee page.

Creating in-depth technical content takes significant time. Your support helps us continue producing high-quality educational content accessible to everyone.