Update pull_request_template.md

.github/pull_request_template.md

@@ -1,29 +1,41 @@
-## Summary
+## Product Description
+<!--
+Delete this section if the PR does not contain any visible changes.
+For non-invisible changes, describe the user-facing effects.
+-->
+
+## Technical Summary
 <!--
-    Provide a link to the ticket or document which prompted this change,
-    Describe the rationale and design decisions.
+- Provide a link to the ticket or document which prompted this change.
+- Describe the rationale and design decisions.
 -->
 
 ## Feature Flag
 <!-- If this is specific to a feature flag, which one? -->
 
-## Product Description
-<!-- For non-invisible changes, describe user-facing effects. Would be good to add screenshots/videos for any major user facing changes -->
+## Safety Assurance
 
-## PR Checklist
+### Safety story
+<!--
+Describe:
+- how you became confident in this change (such as local testing).
+- why the change is inherently safe, and/or plans to limit the defect blast radius.
 
-- [ ] If I think the PR is high risk, "High Risk" label is set
-- [ ] I have confidence that this PR will not introduce a regression for the reasons below
-- [ ] Do we need to enhance manual QA test coverage ? If yes, "QA Note" label is set correctly
-- [ ] Does the PR introduce any major changes worth communicating ? If yes, "Release Note" label is set and a "Release Note" is specified in PR description.
+In particular consider how existing data may be impacted by this change.
+-->
 
 ### Automated test coverage
+<!-- Identify the related test coverage and the conditions it will catch -->
 
-<!-- Identify the related test coverage and the tests it would catch -->
+### QA Plan
+<!--
+- Describe QA plan that (along with test coverage) proves that this PR is regression free.
+- Link to QA Ticket
+-->
 
+## Labels and Review
 
-### Safety story
-<!--
-Describe any other pieces to the safety story including
-local testing, why the change is inherently safe, and/or plans to limit the blast radius of a defect.
---> 
+- [ ] Do we need to enhance the manual QA test coverage ? If yes, the "QA Note" label is set correctly
+- [ ] Does the PR introduce any major changes worth communicating ? If yes, the "Release Note" label is set and a "Release Note" is specified in PR description.
+- [ ] Risk label is set correctly
+- [ ] The set of people pinged as reviewers is appropriate for the level of risk of the change