greploop-apps
Skill1 starsChanged 58 days agoMITView on GitHub
Iteratively improves a PR (GitHub), MR (GitLab), or shelved changelist (Perforce) until Greptile gives it a 5/5 confidence score with zero unresolved comments. Identical to greploop, but triggers reviews by tagging @greptile-apps, which bypasses Greptile's file-count limit on huge PRs that the plain @greptile mention refuses to review. Use when the user wants to fully optimize a large PR/MR/CL against Greptile's code review standards.
- Commits and pushes
4 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- michaelshimeles/rstacktheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- michaelshimeles/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- jaydubya818/MissionControltheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- imornar/skillsword for word, first seen Sep 17, 2026
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- imornar/skills★ 0100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 3
- michaelshimeles/rstack★ 1.4ksame name
- michaelshimeles/skills★ 1.4ksame name
- jaydubya818/MissionControl★ 2same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository9 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- naga-factory/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- before-and-afterSkill
- code-structureSkill
- evidence-driven-testingSkill
- greploopSkill
- naga-factorySkill
- new-featureSkill
- unslopSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
17 rules. 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
12
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 71
Ensure the correct workspace (p4 client) is set before proceeding.
- Distinctive: line 97
Wait for checks to start after push/shelve:
- Very specific: line 109
If Greptile is not already running (PENDING or IN_PROGRESS), request a fresh review:
- Distinctive: line 165
If polling times out, stop the greploop workflow and report the timeout.
- Distinctive: line 174
If no pipeline is running, post a trigger comment:
- Very specific: line 256
Look for the most recent entry from greptile-apps[bot] or greptile-apps-staging[bot].
- Distinctive: line 278
Check the description field for a Greptile-appended score block.
- Distinctive: line 281
If your installation uses a review tool such as Helix Swarm, fetch comments via its API.
- Distinctive: line 292
Prefer exact username match if known
- Very specific: line 299
Use whichever source has the most recently updated score.
- Distinctive: line 327
Stop the loop if any of these are true:
- Distinctive: line 336
Read the file and understand the comment in context.
- Distinctive: line 338
If actionable, make the fix.
- Distinctive: line 339
If informational or a false positive, note it but still resolve the thread.
- Distinctive: line 416
After exiting the loop, summarize:
- Distinctive: line 426
If the loop exited due to max iterations, list any remaining unresolved comments and suggest next steps.
- Very specific: line 439
If not fully resolved (<N> is the effective cap — the --max-iterations value supplied, or 10 by default):
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Greploop Apps
Iteratively fix a PR/MR/CL until Greptile gives a perfect review: 5/5 confidence, zero unresolved comments. This variant tags @greptile-apps to trigger reviews, which bypasses the file-count limit that makes Greptile skip huge PRs (e.g. "Too many files changed for review"). Because auto-review skips those PRs, every push needs a fresh @greptile-apps review comment.
Inputs
- PR/MR/CL number (optional): If not provided, detect the PR/MR for the current branch, or the default pending changelist for p4.
--max-iterations N(optional, default 10): cap on review-fix-push cycles before the loop stops and reports the current state. Raise it for large PRs where Greptile keeps surfacing new findings; lower it to bound cost.
Instructions
0. Detect platform
First check for Perforce, then fall back to git remote detection:
# Check for Perforce environment
if p4 info >/dev/null 2>&1; then
VCS="perforce"
else
REMOTE_URL=$(git remote get-url origin)
if echo "$REMOTE_URL" | grep -qi "gitlab"; then
VCS="gitlab"
else
VCS="github"
fi
fiFor self-hosted GitLab instances whose hostname doesn't contain "gitlab", the user can override by passing --vcs gitlab as an input. For Perforce, pass --vcs perforce.
1. Identify the PR/MR/CL
GitHub:
gh pr view --json number,headRefName -q '{number: .number, branch: .headRefName}'GitLab:
glab mr view --output json | jq '{iid: .iid, branch: .source_branch}'Switch to the PR/MR branch if not already on it.
Perforce:
# List pending changelists for current user/client
p4 changes -s pending -u $P4USER -c $P4CLIENT
# Describe a specific CL
p4 describe -s <CL_NUMBER>Ensure the correct workspace (p4 client) is set before proceeding.
Key field differences:
- GitHub:
number,headRefName,headRefOid - GitLab:
iid,source_branch,sha - Perforce: changelist number,
P4CLIENT, shelved files
2. Loop
Repeat the following cycle at most --max-iterations times (default 10) to avoid runaway loops.
A. Trigger Greptile review
Push/shelve the latest changes (if any):
GitHub/GitLab:
git pushPerforce:
# Re-shelve to update the shelved files for review
p4 shelve -f -c <CL_NUMBER>Wait for checks to start after push/shelve:
sleep 5GitHub — check if Greptile is already running before posting a new trigger comment:
GREPTILE_STATE=$(gh pr checks <PR_NUMBER> --json name,state | jq -r '.[] | select(.name | test("greptile"; "i")) | .state')If Greptile is not already running (PENDING or IN_PROGRESS), request a fresh review:
if [ "$GREPTILE_STATE" != "PENDING" ] && [ "$GREPTILE_STATE" != "IN_PROGRESS" ]; then
gh pr comment <PR_NUMBER> --body "@greptile-apps review"
fiThen poll for the Greptile check run to complete:
HEAD_SHA=$(gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --json headRefOid -q .headRefOid)
ATTEMPTS=0
MAX_ATTEMPTS=60
POLL_INTERVAL_SECONDS=10
while true; do
ATTEMPTS=$((ATTEMPTS + 1))
if [ "$ATTEMPTS" -gt "$MAX_ATTEMPTS" ]; then
echo "Timed out waiting for the Greptile check run after approximately 10 minutes." >&2
exit 1
fi
GREPTILE_CHECK=$(gh api "repos/{owner}/{repo}/commits/$HEAD_SHA/check-runs" \
--jq '.check_runs[] | select(.name | test("greptile"; "i"))' 2>/dev/null)
if [ -z "$GREPTILE_CHECK" ]; then
echo "Waiting for Greptile check to appear..."
sleep "$POLL_INTERVAL_SECONDS"
continue
fi
STATUS=$(echo "$GREPTILE_CHECK" | jq -r '.status // "completed"')
CONCLUSION=$(echo "$GREPTILE_CHECK" | jq -r '.conclusion // "pending"')
if [ "$STATUS" = "completed" ]; then
if [ "$CONCLUSION" = "success" ]; then
echo "Greptile check passed!"
else
echo "Greptile check completed with: $CONCLUSION"
fi
break
fi
echo "Waiting for Greptile... (status: $STATUS)"
sleep "$POLL_INTERVAL_SECONDS"
doneHuge-PR fallback: on PRs over Greptile's file limit, the tagged review may never create a check run for the new head — Greptile instead edits its existing summary comment when it finishes. If the check run has not appeared after a few attempts, poll the latest Greptile-authored issue comment instead and stop when its updated_at moves past the time you posted the trigger and its body carries a confidence score (rather than the "Too many files changed" notice):
gh api --paginate "repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<PR_NUMBER>/comments?per_page=100" \
--jq '[.[] | select(.user.login | test("greptile"; "i"))] | sort_by(.updated_at) | last | {updated_at, body}'If polling times out, stop the greploop workflow and report the timeout. Do not continue with stale or missing review results.
GitLab — check if Greptile is already running before posting a trigger comment:
PIPELINES=$(glab api "projects/:fullpath/merge_requests/<MR_IID>/pipelines")
GREPTILE_RUNNING=$(echo "$PIPELINES" | jq '[.[] | select(.status == "running" or .status == "pending")] | length')If no pipeline is running, post a trigger comment:
if [ "$GREPTILE_RUNNING" = "0" ]; then
glab mr note <MR_IID> --message "@greptile-apps review"
fiPerforce — Perforce does not have native check runs. If Greptile is integrated via a webhook triggered on p4 shelve, wait for it to process. Check your Greptile installation's webhook endpoint or dashboard for the review status. Poll by re-fetching the Greptile review comment on the CL until a score appears.
Then poll for the Greptile pipeline job to complete (see GitLab API reference):
HEAD_SHA=$(glab mr view <MR_IID> --output json | jq -r '.sha')
ATTEMPTS=0
MAX_ATTEMPTS=60
POLL_INTERVAL_SECONDS=10
while true; do
ATTEMPTS=$((ATTEMPTS + 1))
if [ "$ATTEMPTS" -gt "$MAX_ATTEMPTS" ]; then
echo "Timed out waiting for the Greptile pipeline job after approximately 10 minutes." >&2
exit 1
fi
PIPELINES=$(glab api "projects/:fullpath/merge_requests/<MR_IID>/pipelines")
# Find the most recent pipeline for this SHA
PIPELINE_ID=$(echo "$PIPELINES" | jq -r --arg sha "$HEAD_SHA" \
'[.[] | select(.sha == $sha)] | sort_by(.id) | last | .id // empty')
if [ -z "$PIPELINE_ID" ]; then
echo "Waiting for Greptile pipeline to appear..."
sleep "$POLL_INTERVAL_SECONDS"
continue
fi
JOBS=$(glab api "projects/:fullpath/pipelines/$PIPELINE_ID/jobs")
GREPTILE_JOB=$(echo "$JOBS" | jq '.[] | select(.name | test("greptile"; "i"))')
if [ -z "$GREPTILE_JOB" ]; then
echo "Waiting for Greptile job to appear..."
sleep "$POLL_INTERVAL_SECONDS"
continue
fi
JOB_STATUS=$(echo "$GREPTILE_JOB" | jq -r '.status')
if [ "$JOB_STATUS" = "success" ] || [ "$JOB_STATUS" = "failed" ] || [ "$JOB_STATUS" = "canceled" ]; then
echo "Greptile job completed with: $JOB_STATUS"
break
fi
echo "Waiting for Greptile... (status: $JOB_STATUS)"
sleep "$POLL_INTERVAL_SECONDS"
doneIf polling times out, stop the greploop workflow and report the timeout. Do not continue with stale or missing review results.
B. Fetch Greptile review results
Greptile may surface its score in several places — check all of the relevant sources:
GitHub:
1. PR description (body):
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --json body -q '.body'2. General PR comments (issue comments):
gh api --paginate "repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<PR_NUMBER>/comments?per_page=100"Filter for Greptile-authored comments and use the body from the most recently updated comment (updated_at), not the most recently created comment. Greptile may edit the same general PR comment on each review cycle; parse the current body, including the "Prompt to fix all with AI" section, before deciding there are no remaining issues.
3. PR reviews:
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR_NUMBER>/reviewsLook for the most recent entry from greptile-apps[bot] or greptile-apps-staging[bot].
GitLab:
1. MR description (body):
glab mr view <MR_IID> --output json | jq -r '.description'2. MR notes (comments):
glab api "projects/:fullpath/merge_requests/<MR_IID>/notes"Filter for notes from the Greptile bot user (check the author.username field — the exact username may vary per installation; verify on first run).
Perforce:
1. CL description:
p4 describe -s <CL_NUMBER>Check the description field for a Greptile-appended score block.
2. CL comments / review notes: If your installation uses a review tool such as Helix Swarm, fetch comments via its API.
Example (Swarm API): GET /api/v11/comments?topic=reviews/<REVIEW_ID>
Response fields of interest typically include:
- user (author username)
- body (comment text)
- flags/state indicating whether the comment is resolved
Filter to comments authored by the Greptile bot:
- Prefer exact username match if known
- Otherwise, use a heuristic where the author name contains "greptile" (case-insensitive)
For all platforms, parse the text for:
- Confidence score: a pattern like
3/5or5/5(orConfidence: 3/5). - Comment count: Number of inline review comments noted in the summary.
Use whichever source has the most recently updated score. For GitHub, prefer updated_at from issue comments when comparing an edited Greptile summary against older review entries.
Also fetch all unresolved inline comments:
GitHub:
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<PR_NUMBER>/commentsAlso carry forward actionable items from the latest Greptile general PR comment, especially the "Prompt to fix all with AI" section, even if the inline comment endpoint returns zero unresolved comments.
GitLab:
glab api "projects/:fullpath/merge_requests/<MR_IID>/discussions"Filter to DiffNote type discussions (notes[0].type == "DiffNote") from Greptile that are on the latest commit and not yet resolved ("resolved": false).
Perforce: If using Swarm:
Fetch inline diff comments for the review associated with the CL
GET /api/v11/comments?topic=reviews/<REVIEW_ID>
Filter to comments from the Greptile bot user that have not been marked as resolved/addressed.
C. Check exit conditions
Stop the loop if any of these are true:
- Confidence score is 5/5 AND there are zero unresolved comments
--max-iterationsreached (report current state)
D. Fix actionable comments
For each unresolved Greptile comment:
- Read the file and understand the comment in context.
- Determine if it's actionable (code change needed) or informational.
- If actionable, make the fix.
- If informational or a false positive, note it but still resolve the thread.
E. Resolve threads
GitHub — fetch unresolved review threads and resolve all that have been addressed (see GraphQL reference):
gh api graphql -f query='
query($cursor: String) {
repository(owner: "OWNER", name: "REPO") {
pullRequest(number: PR_NUMBER) {
reviewThreads(first: 100, after: $cursor) {
pageInfo { hasNextPage endCursor }
nodes {
id
isResolved
comments(first: 1) {
nodes { body path author { login } }
}
}
}
}
}
}'Resolve addressed threads:
gh api graphql -f query='
mutation {
t1: resolveReviewThread(input: {threadId: "ID1"}) { thread { isResolved } }
t2: resolveReviewThread(input: {threadId: "ID2"}) { thread { isResolved } }
}'GitLab — fetch unresolved discussions and resolve each one (see GitLab API reference):
glab api "projects/:fullpath/merge_requests/<MR_IID>/discussions?per_page=100"Filter for "resolved": false discussions. Then resolve each by its id:
glab api --method PUT \
"projects/:fullpath/merge_requests/<MR_IID>/discussions/<DISCUSSION_ID>" \
--field resolved=trueRepeat for each unresolved discussion ID. (GitLab has no batch resolution — loop through each one.)
F. Commit and push / re-shelve
GitHub/GitLab:
git add -A
git commit -m "address greptile review feedback (greploop iteration N)"
git pushPerforce:
# Stage changes back into the CL and re-shelve for the next review round
p4 shelve -f -c <CL_NUMBER>Wait for checks to start after push/shelve:
sleep 5Then go back to step A.
3. Report
After exiting the loop, summarize:
| Field | Value |
| Platform | GitHub / GitLab / Perforce |
| Iterations | N |
| Final confidence | X/5 |
| Comments resolved | N |
| Remaining comments | N (if any) |
If the loop exited due to max iterations, list any remaining unresolved comments and suggest next steps.
Output format
Greploop complete.
Platform: GitHub
Iterations: 2
Confidence: 5/5
Resolved: 7 comments
Remaining: 0If not fully resolved (<N> is the effective cap — the --max-iterations value supplied, or 10 by default):
Greploop stopped after <N> iterations (--max-iterations <N>).
Platform: GitLab
Confidence: 4/5
Resolved: 12 comments
Remaining: 2
Remaining issues:
- src/auth.ts:45 — "Consider rate limiting this endpoint"
- src/db.ts:112 — "Missing index on user_id column"Perforce example:
Greploop complete.
Platform: Perforce
Changelist: 12345
Iterations: 3
Confidence: 5/5
Resolved: 9 comments
Remaining: 0Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

