- Write like release notes for actual users, not a marketing summary. Be concrete and plain-spoken.
- Avoid generic payoff clauses like "making X faster", "improving reliability", "for a smoother workflow", or "so you can..." unless the diff clearly proves that exact user-visible outcome.
- Prefer short direct bullets: what changed, where users see it, and only one consequence if it is obvious.
- Avoid internal implementation details, but do not replace them with vague benefits. If a technical change has no clear user-visible effect, omit it or group it under a plain reliability bullet.
- Avoid internal component names unless users see them (ex: "VS Code extension", "Desktop app", "Web app").
- For @packages/vscode/CHANGELOG.md: Craft entries specifically for behavior that is present in the VS Code extension. Exclude Desktop app, Web app, Mobile/PWA, and main-app-only UI. Do not copy shared/main changelog bullets into this file unless changed files or code paths show the feature exists in the extension. Focus on core UI improvements and VS Code integration. Do NOT use "VSCode:" or "VS Code:" prefixes in this file.
- Use area prefixes when helpful for grouping in the main @CHANGELOG.md (e.g., "Chat:", "VSCode:", "Settings:", "Git:", "Terminal:", "Mobile:", "UI:").
- Credit contributors inline using "(thanks to @username)" at the end of the bullet. Find contributor usernames from commit authors (not email, but a github username) or PR metadata when available. Skip if contributor is btriapitsyn, since this is a repo owner.
- For every bullet, ask: "Could a user point to this in the UI or behavior?" If not, rewrite it or drop it.
- For every VS Code bullet, verify the change applies to the extension, not just shared web UI or server code. When unsure, leave it out of @packages/vscode/CHANGELOG.md.
- Do not mention low-level mechanics such as "local refs first", "source of truth", "route", "store", "cache", "payload", or "ref resolution". Translate only when there is a clear user-facing symptom.
- Do not bundle unrelated changes just to reduce bullet count. It is better to omit minor internal fixes than to create a vague catch-all sentence.
- Avoid LinkedIn-style language. Bad: "commit review is faster and branch history is more reliable." Better: "commit history can now show file diffs inline." Bad: "installed-state accuracy is improved." Better: "the skills list now matches OpenCode's installed skills more closely."
- If changes are mostly internal refactors, mention them only when there is a concrete user-visible fix. Otherwise do not add a changelog bullet for them.