Skip to main content
rulesSource-backed

Content-Only Submission PR Gate Rules

Source-backed rules for preparing direct content-only pull requests with one raw MDX file, reachable provenance URLs, issue closure, duplicate history, validation evidence, and no generated artifact churn.

by MkDev11·added 2026-06-04·
Review first review before installing

Open the source and read safety notes before installing.

Citation facts

Source-backed facts for citing this resource, derived directly from the registry — also available as plain text for AI assistants.

Source URLs
https://github.com/JSONbored/awesome-claude/blob/main/.github/pull_request_template.md, https://github.com/JSONbored/awesome-claude/blob/main/content/rules/content-only-submission-pr-gate-rules.mdx
Safety notes
These rules do not run content or automate submissions; they are a review gate for keeping direct content PRs focused and verifiable., Do not run generators, package builds, download packaging, README refreshes, or maintainer automation while preparing a content-only PR unless the issue explicitly requires it., If the submitted entry describes hooks, MCP servers, shell commands, installers, credentialed tools, external writes, or destructive actions, require specific safety notes for that entry before opening the PR.
Privacy notes
PR bodies, source URLs, issue links, duplicate-search notes, screenshots, and validation logs are public review artifacts., Do not use private repositories, customer names, internal docs, local paths, account identifiers, tokens, screenshots with secrets, or unpublished data as public source evidence., When validation output or duplicate evidence contains private details, summarize the verification class publicly and keep sensitive evidence in the approved private channel.
Author
MkDev11
Submitted by
MkDev11
Claim status
unclaimed
Last verified
2026-06-04

Decision playbook

Review trust signals before you adopt

Signals are present but mixed. Use the checklist below to confirm the source and operational safety for your environment.

Compare context
Selected

0

Current score

78

Baseline

Delta

No baseline selected

No major trust-signal divergence detected in the current selection.

Source and provenance checks

Complete

Confirm ownership and provenance before trusting install instructions.

  • Source link availableRequired

    Open the canonical repository and verify ownership.

    Done
  • Source provenance statusRequired

    Marked as source-backed.

    Done
  • Metadata reviewed

    Registry metadata indicates a reviewed listing.

    Done

Safety and privacy checks

Complete

Validate risk disclosures before installation or API wiring.

  • Safety notes presentRequired

    Review the listed safety guidance before running commands.

    Done
  • Privacy notes presentRequired

    Review data handling notes before connecting accounts or secrets.

    Done
  • Trust level risk gateRequired

    Trust level does not block evaluation.

    Done

Package and install checks

Needs review

Check package metadata and artifact integrity signals.

  • Install payload available

    Install or copy payload is available for review.

    Done
  • Package verification flag

    No package verification flag provided.

    Pending
  • Checksum metadata

    No checksum provided for downloaded artifact.

    Pending

Compare-driven decision checks

Needs review

Use compare context to validate trade-offs before adoption.

  • Compare tray has multiple entries

    Add at least one more entry to compare trust differences.

    Pending
  • Baseline comparison available

    No baseline peer selected yet.

    Pending
  • Diverging trust signals identified

    No major trust-signal divergence found.

    Pending

Setup at a glance

Copy & paste

Copy-ready — paste the snippet to get started.

10 minutes

Adoption plan

Balanced adoption plan

Current risk score 16/100. Use staged verification before broader rollout.

Risk 16

Pre-adoption checks

Validate source and review signals before any execution.

  • Confirm source provenanceRequired

    Source URL/provenance metadata is present.

    Done
  • Confirm metadata review state

    Listing has review metadata.

    Done
  • Verify install payload

    Install/config payload exists and can be inspected.

    Done

Security checks

Confirm safety, privacy, and package integrity signals.

  • Review safety notesRequired

    Safety notes are present.

    Done
  • Review privacy notesRequired

    Privacy notes are present.

    Done
  • Verify package integrity metadata

    No package verification/checksum metadata.

    Pending

Rollout

Adopt in controlled steps based on the selected plan.

  • Run in isolated sandbox firstRequired

    Use a constrained sandbox and observe behavior across multiple tasks.

    Pending
  • Roll out graduallyRequired

    Roll out to a small cohort before wider usage.

    Pending
  • Set monitoring and fallback

    Define rollback path and monitor errors after adoption.

    Pending

Evidence readiness

Evidence readiness matrix · balanced

Required evidence gates are covered (5/6 signals complete).

Risk 15

Source provenance

Present

Source repository/provenance is listed.

Required in this preset

Metadata review

Present

Review metadata is present.

Required in this preset

Safety notes

Present

Safety notes are present.

Required in this preset

Privacy notes

Present

Privacy notes are present.

Optional in this preset

Package integrity

Missing

Package integrity metadata is missing.

Optional in this preset

Install payload

Present

Install payload is available.

Required in this preset

Required evidence gates are covered for this preset.

Decision timeline

Decision timeline · balanced

5/6 steps complete with no blocking gaps for this preset.

Risk 14

triage

Confirm source provenanceRequired

Source/provenance metadata is available.

Done

triage

Check metadata review statusRequired

Review metadata is available.

Done

verify

Review safety notesRequired

Safety notes are available.

Done

verify

Review privacy notes

Privacy notes are available.

Done

verify

Validate package integrity metadata

Package integrity metadata is missing.

Pending

rollout

Verify install payload and commandsRequired

Install payload is available.

Done

No required blockers for this timeline preset.

Prerequisite readiness

Prerequisite readiness

4 prerequisites to line up before setup.

0/4 ready
Network & hosting1General310 minutes

Safety & privacy surface

Safety & privacy surface

3 safety and 3 privacy notes across 5 risk areas. Review closely: credentials & tokens, network access.

5 areas
  • SafetyExecution & processesThese rules do not run content or automate submissions; they are a review gate for keeping direct content PRs focused and verifiable.
  • SafetyNetwork accessDo not run generators, package builds, download packaging, README refreshes, or maintainer automation while preparing a content-only PR unless the issue explicitly requires it.
  • SafetyCredentials & tokensIf the submitted entry describes hooks, MCP servers, shell commands, installers, credentialed tools, external writes, or destructive actions, require specific safety notes for that entry before opening the PR.
  • PrivacyData retentionPR bodies, source URLs, issue links, duplicate-search notes, screenshots, and validation logs are public review artifacts.
  • PrivacyCredentials & tokensDo not use private repositories, customer names, internal docs, local paths, account identifiers, tokens, screenshots with secrets, or unpublished data as public source evidence.
  • PrivacyGeneralWhen validation output or duplicate evidence contains private details, summarize the verification class publicly and keep sensitive evidence in the approved private channel.

Safety notes

  • These rules do not run content or automate submissions; they are a review gate for keeping direct content PRs focused and verifiable.
  • Do not run generators, package builds, download packaging, README refreshes, or maintainer automation while preparing a content-only PR unless the issue explicitly requires it.
  • If the submitted entry describes hooks, MCP servers, shell commands, installers, credentialed tools, external writes, or destructive actions, require specific safety notes for that entry before opening the PR.

Privacy notes

  • PR bodies, source URLs, issue links, duplicate-search notes, screenshots, and validation logs are public review artifacts.
  • Do not use private repositories, customer names, internal docs, local paths, account identifiers, tokens, screenshots with secrets, or unpublished data as public source evidence.
  • When validation output or duplicate evidence contains private details, summarize the verification class publicly and keep sensitive evidence in the approved private channel.

Prerequisites

  • A selected content slot issue, target category, proposed title, and proposed slug before creating the branch.
  • Public source URLs that load successfully and directly support the entry's claims.
  • A duplicate-search pass across existing content, live PRs, closed PRs, source domains, docs URLs, package URLs, provider names, and aliases.
  • A local checkout where category validation, content policy validation, and whitespace checks can run before the branch is pushed.

Schema details

Install type
copy
Reading time
6 min
Difficulty score
35
Troubleshooting
Yes
Breaking changes
No
Collection metadata
Estimated setup
10 minutes
Difficulty
beginner
Full copyable content
You are preparing a direct content-only pull request.

Rules:
1. Change exactly one raw content file under content/<category>/<slug>.mdx.
2. Keep README output, generated registry files, downloads, workflows,
   package files, scripts, and unrelated content out of the PR.
3. Verify every source URL as publicly reachable and directly relevant before
   putting it in frontmatter or the PR body.
4. Link the exact child issue with a supported closing keyword.
5. Document duplicate checks across titles, slugs, source URLs, docs URLs,
   providers, aliases, existing content, open PRs, and closed PRs.
6. Run focused validation before pushing and report the exact commands.
7. Stop before opening the PR when source proof, duplicate history, safety
   notes, privacy notes, or one-file scope is incomplete.

About this resource

Purpose

Use these rules before opening a direct content-only pull request. The goal is to make the branch easy for maintainers and automation to classify: one raw source file, reachable source evidence, documented duplicate history, focused validation, and no generated output.

This is not a general contributor tutorial. It is a gate an AI coding assistant or contributor can apply at the moment when a content branch is almost ready to push.

Gate Inputs

Collect these inputs before creating the content file.

  1. Slot and category. Name the child issue, requested category, target directory, title, and slug.
  2. Source evidence. List official docs, repository files, package pages, standards, or primary project pages that prove the claims in the entry.
  3. Nearby content. Search existing rules, guides, hooks, skills, collections, commands, agents, open PRs, and closed PRs for the same workflow or source URL.
  4. Risk class. Decide whether the submitted entry describes executable code, install commands, credentialed tools, local file reads, external writes, network calls, telemetry, logs, or generated artifacts.
  5. Validation path. Know the category validator and content policy command before opening the PR.

Do not open the PR while any gate input is still unknown.

Scope Rules

  • Add or modify exactly one raw MDX source file under the requested content/<category>/ directory.
  • Do not edit README output, generated registry data, route files, feeds, downloads, ZIP or MCPB artifacts, package metadata, workflows, scripts, or unrelated content.
  • Do not reformat neighboring files, rename existing entries, reorder content directories, or update shared metadata as a side task.
  • Keep the branch based on current upstream main so the PR does not open behind the base branch.
  • If a rejected one-shot submission is being repaired, create a fresh branch and PR with the actual blocker fixed rather than force-pushing the closed PR.

Source Rules

  • Put only reachable public URLs in documentationUrl, repoUrl, and sourceUrls.
  • Prefer primary sources: repository files, official docs, standards, package pages, release notes, or the target repository's validation files.
  • Verify source URLs with a real HTTP request or browser load before opening the PR.
  • Cite the final URL without trailing punctuation, markdown backticks, tracking parameters, local paths, or private redirects.
  • Use sources that support the operational claims in the entry, not just the title.
  • Replace any source that returns a hard 404, requires private auth, or points to a file that does not exist on the target repository's default branch.

Duplicate Rules

Search and record:

  • title, slug, aliases, provider name, package name, docs URL, repository URL, source URL, and source domain;
  • same-category entries and adjacent-category entries that solve the same problem;
  • open PRs, closed PRs, and merged PR history for the child issue;
  • earlier rejection reasons, especially duplicate, source failure, wrong category, generated artifacts, or missing safety/privacy evidence.

The PR body should name the closest related content and explain the difference in one or two concrete sentences.

PR Body Rules

The PR body should include:

  • the exact closing reference for the child issue, such as Closes #730;
  • a summary that says the PR changes one content file;
  • duplicate and closed-PR history;
  • source URL verification notes;
  • validation commands;
  • a statement that generated artifacts, README output, workflows, package files, and scripts were not changed.

GitHub supports linked pull requests that close issues with keywords, and this repository's PR template asks direct content submissions to confirm one-file scope, source/provenance, author attribution, and generated-artifact boundaries.

Validation Rules

Run focused checks before pushing the branch.

git diff --check upstream/main...HEAD
node scripts/validate-content.mjs --category rules
node scripts/ci/validate-content-policy.mjs --files-json /tmp/content-pr-files.json --head-repo <fork-owner>/<repo> --base-repo JSONbored/awesome-claude --head-ref <branch> --pr-author <author>

The files JSON manifest should contain only the intended MDX source file. If a validator reports another file, stop and remove the unrelated change before the PR is opened.

Safety And Privacy Rules

Do not use generic warnings when the submitted content has real runtime risk. Require specific notes when the entry:

  • runs shell commands, install commands, hooks, package managers, or build tools;
  • reads files, browsers, repositories, databases, tickets, logs, prompts, or screenshots;
  • uses credentials, cookies, OAuth, API keys, database URLs, MCP permissions, or cloud accounts;
  • writes to external services, sends messages, opens PRs, edits issues, deploys code, or publishes artifacts;
  • stores or transmits user data, telemetry, traces, generated output, or validation logs.

If none of those behaviors apply, the safety and privacy notes should say that the rule itself is review-process guidance and explain what public review artifacts still exist.

Merge Blockers

Do not open or approve the PR when:

  • more than one content file changed;
  • generated output, README sections, workflows, package files, scripts, or downloads changed;
  • any sourceUrls value is private, broken, redirected to an error page, or decorated with stray markdown characters;
  • the PR body lacks the child issue closure reference;
  • the duplicate check ignores an obvious related entry, open PR, or closed PR;
  • safety or privacy notes are generic for a tool that can execute code, read local data, use credentials, or write externally;
  • local validation was skipped without an explicit reason;
  • the branch is already behind upstream main before the PR is opened.

Review Checklist

  • {"task": "One file", "description": "The diff contains exactly one raw MDX file under the requested content category"}
  • {"task": "Sources reachable", "description": "Every documentation, repository, and source URL loads publicly and supports the entry"}
  • {"task": "Issue closes", "description": "The PR body includes the exact child issue closing reference"}
  • {"task": "History checked", "description": "Existing content, open PRs, closed PRs, source domains, titles, slugs, and aliases were searched"}
  • {"task": "Artifacts excluded", "description": "README output, generated files, workflows, packages, scripts, and downloads were not edited"}
  • {"task": "Validation recorded", "description": "Whitespace, category validation, and content policy validation ran against the reviewed branch"}

Troubleshooting

  • A source URL returns 404: replace it with the final reachable source, then rerun source verification before opening a new PR.
  • The entry overlaps a guide: make the rule enforce a pre-open or pre-merge decision, and explain how it differs from the contributor guide.
  • The PR is behind upstream: rebase before opening or immediately after GitHub reports the stale base.
  • The closed PR had a private-gate comment: fix the exact blocker in a new branch and name the prior close reason in the PR body.
  • The validation command needs a files manifest: write a JSON array with the single intended file path and pass it to the policy validator.

Duplicate And History Check

Checked existing rules, guides, collections, hooks, skills, commands, open PRs, closed PRs, repository templates, and validator scripts for content-only PR hygiene, direct content submissions, source-backed content PRs, generated artifact churn, one-file PR gates, issue-closing keywords, and source URL verification.

Adjacent content includes the source-backed content PR guide and generated artifact churn rules. This entry is distinct because it is an operational gate for AI coding assistants and contributors immediately before opening a direct content-only PR: it blocks stale branches, broken source URLs, missing issue closure, incomplete closed-PR history, and accidental generated-artifact scope.

PR #1135 previously attempted this slot and was closed because source URLs were reported as hard 404 failures. This resubmission uses verified reachable URLs and a new slug while keeping the one-file rules scope.

Sources

Source citations

Add this badge to your README

Show that Content-Only Submission PR Gate Rules is listed on HeyClaude. Paste this Markdown into your README — it renders the badge and links back to this page.

Listed on HeyClaude
[![Listed on HeyClaude](https://heyclau.de/badge/rules/content-only-submission-pr-gate-rules.svg)](https://heyclau.de/entry/rules/content-only-submission-pr-gate-rules)

How it compares

Content-Only Submission PR Gate Rules side by side with 3 alternatives on trust, install, platform support, and disclosed safety notes — all from reviewed registry metadata.

1 trust signal differ across this comparison (Submitter).

Field

Source-backed rules for preparing direct content-only pull requests with one raw MDX file, reachable provenance URLs, issue closure, duplicate history, validation evidence, and no generated artifact churn.

Open dossier

Source-backed rules for requiring coding agents to provide fresh, scoped, and reviewer-visible test evidence before a pull request can be approved or merged.

Open dossier

Source-backed rules for reviewing AI-generated request handlers and forms before merge for cross-site request forgery risk, covering state-changing method discipline, anti-CSRF token correctness, SameSite cookie posture, origin and referer checks, and safe handling of cookie-based sessions.

Open dossier

Source-backed rules for reviewing AI-generated code that makes server-side URL or network requests for server-side request forgery before merge, covering URL allow-lists, block-lists for internal networks, redirect handling, response isolation, and privacy-safe test evidence.

Open dossier
Next steps
Trust
Review statusReviewedMaintainer reviewedReviewedMaintainer reviewedReviewedMaintainer reviewedReviewedMaintainer reviewed
Package trustPackage not verifiedPackage not verifiedPackage not verifiedPackage not verified
Source provenanceSource-backedSource-backedSource-backedSource-backed
SubmitterDiffersMkDev11MkDev11jaso0n0818jaso0n0818
Install riskReview firstReview firstReview firstReview first
Notes Safety ✓ Privacy ✓ Safety ✓ Privacy ✓ Safety ✓ Privacy ✓ Safety ✓ Privacy ✓
Brand
Categoryrulesrulesrulesrules
SourceSource-backedSource-backedSource-backedSource-backed
AuthorMkDev11MkDev11jaso0n0818jaso0n0818
Added2026-06-042026-06-042026-06-222026-06-19
Platforms
Harness
Source repo
Safety notesThese rules do not run content or automate submissions; they are a review gate for keeping direct content PRs focused and verifiable. Do not run generators, package builds, download packaging, README refreshes, or maintainer automation while preparing a content-only PR unless the issue explicitly requires it. If the submitted entry describes hooks, MCP servers, shell commands, installers, credentialed tools, external writes, or destructive actions, require specific safety notes for that entry before opening the PR.Tests can mutate databases, send network requests, write files, consume cloud quota, or contact sandboxed services; coding agents must use isolated test environments and documented safe commands. Passing one focused test does not prove unrelated risky paths are safe; require broader checks for auth, data deletion, payments, migrations, release automation, and generated artifacts. Treat agent-generated test summaries as untrusted until the reviewer can inspect the exact command, status check, log, or reproducible manual verification evidence.A missing CSRF defense lets a malicious page perform state-changing actions as a logged-in user — transferring funds, changing email or password, or deleting data — using the victim's ambient cookies. AI assistants often generate handlers that work in tests yet omit token validation or perform state changes on GET, because the happy path succeeds without any forged cross-site request. Relying on SameSite cookies alone is not sufficient: defaults vary, Lax still allows top-level GET navigations, and some clients or legacy browsers do not enforce it.SSRF lets an attacker use the server as a proxy to reach internal services, cloud metadata endpoints, and other resources that are not internet-exposed, potentially exposing credentials and configuration. AI assistants frequently write server-side fetch code that accepts a user-supplied URL with no destination check, which looks correct for valid public URLs but becomes a full SSRF on internal targets. Block-lists are fragile; a new cloud provider, a new internal range, or an IPv6 address can bypass them, so an allow-list of permitted destinations is safer when the feature can work with one.
Privacy notesPR bodies, source URLs, issue links, duplicate-search notes, screenshots, and validation logs are public review artifacts. Do not use private repositories, customer names, internal docs, local paths, account identifiers, tokens, screenshots with secrets, or unpublished data as public source evidence. When validation output or duplicate evidence contains private details, summarize the verification class publicly and keep sensitive evidence in the approved private channel.Test logs, snapshots, fixtures, screenshots, coverage reports, and CI artifacts can expose secrets, customer data, internal hostnames, private package names, prompts, or file paths. Do not paste raw private CI logs, database rows, browser traces, screenshots, or failing payloads into public PR comments without redaction. When a test needs private credentials or data, record the approved internal verification channel rather than copying sensitive details into the public PR.CSRF tokens are security credentials; do not paste real tokens, session cookies, or production request captures into public PR comments or issues. Use synthetic accounts and redacted requests when demonstrating a CSRF proof of concept, and avoid attaching real user identifiers. Be careful that anti-CSRF tokens are not written into URLs, analytics, or logs, where they can leak through referer headers or shared dashboards.SSRF responses can contain cloud metadata credentials, internal service tokens, configuration, and personal data; do not include real infrastructure URLs or actual internal responses in test evidence. Do not paste raw SSRF probe results, internal IP addresses, or cloud metadata content into public PR comments. Use a dedicated test server or mock endpoint when demonstrating SSRF prevention so real internal services are never reached during review.
Prerequisites
  • A selected content slot issue, target category, proposed title, and proposed slug before creating the branch.
  • Public source URLs that load successfully and directly support the entry's claims.
  • A duplicate-search pass across existing content, live PRs, closed PRs, source domains, docs URLs, package URLs, provider names, and aliases.
  • A local checkout where category validation, content policy validation, and whitespace checks can run before the branch is pushed.
  • A pull request, branch, or patch created or modified by a coding agent.
  • Access to the repository's documented test commands, CI status checks, and branch-protection rules.
  • Enough diff context to identify touched behavior, affected packages, generated files, and risky runtime paths.
  • Permission to request changes or block merge when test evidence is stale, incomplete, unsafe, or unverifiable.
  • A pull request, diff, or snippet containing an AI-generated or AI-edited request handler, form, or fetch call with enough context to know how the user is authenticated.
  • Knowledge of how the framework manages sessions and CSRF tokens, since built-in protection, cookie defaults, and token helpers differ between frameworks.
  • Awareness of which routes change state and which are read-only, so the review can focus on unsafe methods.
  • Permission to block merge when a cookie-authenticated state change ships without a CSRF defense.
  • A pull request, diff, or snippet of AI-generated code that makes a server-side request to a URL or hostname influenced by user input.
  • Knowledge of the HTTP client in use, since redirect behavior, DNS resolution timing, and IP-binding options differ between libraries.
  • A safe test environment where requests to internal address ranges and metadata endpoints can be attempted without reaching real infrastructure.
  • Permission to block merge when a user-influenced URL can reach internal services, cloud metadata, or other out-of-scope destinations.
Install
Config
Citations
ClaimUnclaimedUnclaimedUnclaimedUnclaimed
Open 4 picks in the interactive comparison tool

Related guides

Signals

Loading live community signals…

More like this, weekly

A short, calm digest of reviewed Claude resources. Unsubscribe any time.