[discussion]: clarify PR contribution process and set expectations around AI-generated submissions #762
Description
Topic
Update CONTRIBUTING.md sections 8 and 9 to set clearer expectations for the issue → PR workflow and address AI-generated drive-by PRs.
Context
The current wording in the CONTRIBUTING.md is a bit loose it doesn't make it clear that an issue should be opened and acknowledged before a PR, and it doesn't set any quality bar for submissions. We've also been seeing an uptick in low-effort, bulk PRs that appear to be fully AI-generated with no human review, which adds unnecessary burden on maintainers.
Possible Ideas / Thoughts
- Make step 8 explicit that the issue comes first and maintainers should have a chance to weigh in before work begins. Strengthen the closure policy into a clear, standalone statement.
- Rewrite step 9 to set concrete PR quality expectations (what/why description, test evidence, readable commits).
- Add a friendly but firm note that AI-assisted contributions are welcome, but purely AI-generated drive-by PRs, where the contributor can't speak to the changes in review will be closed.
- Keep the overall tone welcoming. The goal is to encourage thoughtful contributions, not scare off new contributors.
Additional Information
n/a