I'm not sure I'm entirely on board with this particular format, but I do agree with the larger point of well-crafted commit messages - and commits, for that matter - being an important quality feature in a project.

I'd posit that well-structured commits are principally for the benefit of the reviewer of the code. Order your commits in a fashion that makes sense narratively, and give them meaningful commit messages. Use interactive rebasing liberally if need be to accomplish this goal.

As a reviewer, you are well within your rights to decline a PR that consists of a single non-meaningful commit message and a +/- 1000 lines diff. Effort is expected from both parties in checking in code.