agentleFS
bholmesdevbholmesdev/hubble.md/.agents/skills/review-markdown-comments/SKILL.md

review-markdown-comments

Skill1.5k starsChanged 9 days agoMITView on GitHub

Reply to, resolve, or reopen Hubble review comments stored as CriticMarkup in Markdown files. Use when asked to address a Hubble review comment.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Trending

Steady talk.thin dataabout the whole repository

Dec 2025: 0 mentionsJan 2026: 0 mentionsFeb 2026: 2 mentionsMar 2026: 1 mentionApr 2026: 0 mentionsMay 2026: 0 mentionsJun 2026: 1 mentionJul 2026: 1 mentionAug 2026: 0 mentionsSep 2026: 1 mentionOct 2026: 1 mentionNov 2026: 0 mentions
Dec 2025Jun 2026Nov 2026
Mentions a month of the bholmesdev/hubble.md repository that our weekly crawl found: only 7 in all, so this is a hint, not a trend. There is no adoption data for this file yet.

Who's talking about bholmesdev/hubble.md

The biggest 5 of 7 mentions linking to the repository that our crawl found. Each line is their own headline.

See all 7

Talked about on Bluesky and GitHub (7 times).

On GitHub · 3

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈0

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Always write "v": 1. Escape any -- inside the JSON as \u002d\u002d, since a literal -- terminates the HTML comment early.

    line 30
  2. Very specific:

    Read the complete file. Locate the requested compact id, such as {#c7}.

    line 48
  3. Very specific:

    Write the metadata block immediately after the comment's {#cN} marker (see Fragmented anchors).

    line 64
  4. Very specific:

    Check the surrounding Markdown for accidental changes: inspect git diff -- <file> for a tracked file, or compare the before and after text …

    line 90

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Review Markdown Comments

Work directly on the Markdown file named by the user.

Comment format

Hubble stores review state in the Markdown body using this portable subset:

{==anchored text==}{>>comment body<<}{#c1}
{++suggested insertion++}
{--suggested deletion--}
{~~original text~>replacement text~~}

Thread state may follow a comment anchor as an HTML comment holding raw JSON. It is not URI-encoded; Hubble parses it with JSON.parse directly, so an encoded payload fails to parse and renders as literal text in the note:

<!-- hubble-review:{"v":1,"replies":[],"resolved":false}-->

Hubble uses v, replies, and resolved; other top-level keys are allowed. Always write "v": 1. Escape any -- inside the JSON as \u002d\u002d, since a literal -- terminates the HTML comment early. A reply has this shape:

{
  "id": "r1",
  "body": "Agent response",
  "author": "agent",
  "createdAt": "2026-01-01T00:00:00.000Z"
}

Review markers inside inline code or fenced code are literal text, not comments.

Address a comment

  1. Read the complete file. Locate the requested compact id, such as {#c7}; if the user gives only anchored text, locate the exact CriticMarkup anchor instead. Confirm the anchored text and comment body match the user's request. If the id or exact anchor is absent or ambiguous, stop and report the ambiguity.
  2. Parse the JSON metadata immediately following that logical comment. If it is absent, start from an empty object. If it is malformed, stop rather than overwrite it.
  3. Round-trip the metadata: mutate only the reply list and resolved, then re-serialize the complete object — every other key and every existing reply survives unchanged. Replies are append-only: add a reply with the next unused rN id, author: "agent", the response body, and the current UTC time as an ISO-8601 createdAt.
  4. Set resolved: true only when the user's request has actually been addressed. For an explicit reopen request, set resolved: false. Acknowledgements, tests, questions, and partial work leave it false.
  5. Write the metadata block immediately after the comment's {#cN} marker (see Fragmented anchors). Keep the anchored text byte-for-byte unchanged, along with the comment body, CriticMarkup delimiters, suggested edits, and all unrelated Markdown.

Fragmented anchors

One logical comment id may appear in multiple CriticMarkup fragments. The final fragment is authoritative: keep every marker, keep a single metadata block, and place it after the final fragment — moving it there if it currently follows an earlier fragment. Report the fragmentation if it may affect the user's formatting.

Validation

After editing:

  1. Re-read the file and confirm the requested id and exact anchored text are still present.
  2. Parse the metadata after the final fragment and verify it is valid JSON, the new reply is the final reply, the old replies and other keys round-tripped, and resolved has the intended value. Confirm the note renders the comment rather than showing the raw block as text. Check that every {==, ==}, {>>, <<}, and {# you touched belongs to a complete {==…==}{>>…<<}{#cN} span on one line; a stray delimiter means the span will not parse and shows as raw text in the note.
  3. Check the surrounding Markdown for accidental changes: inspect git diff -- <file> for a tracked file, or compare the before and after text for an ignored/generated file.
  4. Report the reply you left and whether you resolved the comment.

Download now (ZIP)

Does 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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.