docs(agents): Fold pr.mdc into the create-java-pr skill

[runningcode]

📜 Description

Deletes .cursor/rules/pr.mdc (264 lines) and gives its content a single home each:

• Conventions the skill was missing → create-java-pr/SKILL.md: allowed commit types, PR title format, changelog rebase caveat.
• Stacked-PR workflow (~150 lines) → create-java-pr/references/stacked-prs.md, loaded on demand. Git tracks this as a rename.
• Everything else → already duplicated in the skill, so dropped.

The skill now reads .github/pull_request_template.md for the PR body instead of reproducing it, with an explicit instruction never to write it from memory. AGENTS.md drops the pr row from the rule table and points its Changelog section at the skill.

Fixes found by dry-running the result

Agents were run against the deduped docs for "create a PR" and "create a stacked PR", stopping before the first mutating action. Both paths loaded the intended files — the standalone run never opened stacked-prs.md — and surfaced four defects, now fixed:

• SKILL.md named stacked-prs.md the source of truth for branch naming, which it never covered. Claim corrected to title naming.
• Four passages referenced "the collection branch PR"; no step ever opened it. Added, with its title and merge-reminder exceptions.
• The PR-description editing rule was stated three times and had already drifted (&& vs &&/||). Now stated once in SKILL.md, which both paths read.
• AGENTS.md step 7 ("propose but not execute a commit") contradicted the skill, which commits, pushes, and opens the PR. Scoped to implementation work.

💡 Motivation and Context

pr.mdc and the skill described the same six-step workflow. The skill opened by declaring pr.mdc "required reading … the source of truth," then re-implemented every step anyway. Both inlined the PR template and the changelog subsection table.

Nobody on the team uses Cursor, so the split bought nothing — it just doubled the surface that had to stay in sync. And it hadn't: both inlined templates were missing a checklist item .github/pull_request_template.md has since gained:

- [ ] Public API changes reviewed by another Mobile SDK team member or implemented
      according to the develop docs spec

Every PR created through the skill silently dropped it. Pointing at the template file makes that class of drift impossible.

💚 How did you test it?

Docs-only — no code paths affected.

• Dry-ran both PR flows with fresh agents; verified the file sets read, and that every fix above resolves a defect an agent actually hit.
• No references to pr.mdc remain.
• The PR template's section headers appear in exactly one file.
• The AGENTS.md rule table matches .cursor/rules/ exactly (12 rules, 12 rows).
• Spotless covers only Java/Kotlin, so no formatting run applies.

📝 Checklist

• I added GH Issue ID & Linear ID
• I added tests to verify the changes.
• No new PII added or SDK only sends newly added PII if sendDefaultPII is enabled.
• I updated the docs if needed.
• I updated the wizard if needed.
• Review from the native team if needed.
• No breaking change or entry added to the changelog.
• No breaking change for hybrid SDKs or communicated to hybrid SDKs.
• Public API changes reviewed by another Mobile SDK team member or implemented according to the develop docs spec.

🔮 Next steps

Remaining duplication, in order of payoff:

• AGENTS.md repeats ./gradlew spotlessApply apiDump across nine lines; the Makefile is the source of truth. (CONTRIBUTING.md also documents a make format target that doesn't exist — one-line fix held back for its own PR, which this one should follow.)
• Changelog rules still live in both AGENTS.md and the skill.
• Test invocation appears in AGENTS.md, test/SKILL.md, and e2e_tests.mdc; the skill's module→task table is the accurate one.
• Step 0 of the skill has no branch for "this branch already has an open PR" — four dry runs produced four different plans for that case.
• The 12 remaining .cursor/rules/ files are arguably misfiled if nobody uses Cursor, but rehoming them touches every rule reference.

#skip-changelog

[sentry]

📲 Install Builds

Android

🔗 App Name	App ID	Version	Configuration
SDK Size	io.sentry.tests.size	8.53.0 (1)	release

⚙️ sentry-android Build Distribution Settings

[runningcode]

This is a simplified version of .cursor/rules/pr.mdc with just the stacked PRs section. The other generic PR information is already encoded in the skill.

[runningcode]

We have a duplicate of the PR request template and can drift apart so I suggest we have the LLM reference the pull request template.

[sentry]

Bug: The create-java-pr skill references non-existent skills (sentry-skills:commit and sentry-skills:create-pr), which will cause the agent's workflow to fail.
_{Severity: HIGH}

Suggested Fix

Review the create-java-pr skill definition in SKILL.md. Replace the incorrect invocation of sentry-skills:commit with the correct command or skill for committing changes. Similarly, replace the sentry-skills:create-pr invocation with the intended gh pr create command to ensure the pull request can be created successfully.

Prompt for AI Agent

Review the code at the location below. A potential bug has been identified by an AI
agent. Verify if this is a real issue. If it is, propose a fix; if not, explain why it's
not valid.

Location: .claude/skills/create-java-pr/SKILL.md#L92

Potential issue: The `create-java-pr` skill definition in `SKILL.md` instructs an AI
agent to invoke two skills, `sentry-skills:commit` and `sentry-skills:create-pr`, which
do not exist. The pull request was intended to fix these references but failed to do so,
leaving the incorrect skill invocations in place. When an agent attempts to execute the
steps for committing code (Step 3) or creating a pull request (Step 5), it will fail
because the specified skills are not defined anywhere in the repository. This renders
the `create-java-pr` skill unusable.

Also affects:

• .claude/skills/create-java-pr/SKILL.md:124

_{Did we get this right? 👍 / 👎 to inform future reviews.}