triage-reviews
Skill4 starsChanged yesterdayMITView on GitHub
Fetch all unresolved PR review comments (Cursor bot, entelligence, codex-connector, humans) via gh, verify each claim against the actual code, classify valid / false-positive / stale with proof, and apply minimal targeted fixes on approval. Use when the user wants all PR comments addressed or asks to sweep a PR's reviews. For a single pasted comment, use triage-comment instead.
3 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ShaishavMaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- stickerdaniel/linkedin-mcp-servertheir own version, first seen Sep 7, 2026
- tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-servertheir own version, first seen Jun 10, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 3
- stickerdaniel/linkedin-mcp-server★ 4.2ksame name
- ShaishavMaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills★ 59same name
- tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-server★ 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 repository5 other files it gives its agents.
- commitSkill
- councilSkill
- fix-ciSkill
- prSkill
- triage-commentSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 36
Never fix anything you haven't verified.
- Distinctive: line 49
Before each fix, check it introduces no regression or behavior change beyond the finding.
- Distinctive: line 50
Commit atomically by concern, per global commit rules.
“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
Triage PR Reviews
Replaces the paste-one-comment-at-a-time ritual. Works on the current branch's PR by default; accepts a PR number or URL as an argument. For a single pasted finding, use /triage-comment.
Step 1 — Fetch every unresolved comment
gh pr view --json number,url,title 2>/dev/null # resolve PR from current branch
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{n}/comments # inline review comments (bots post here)
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{n}/comments # issue-level comments
gh pr view {n} --json reviews # review bodiesCollect everything not yet resolved/outdated. Note the author (cursor bot, entelligence-ai, chatgpt-codex-connector, human) and timestamp.
Step 2 — Verify before believing
For each finding, trace the claim through the actual code. Bots are frequently wrong or stale — verification is the point of this skill, not ceremony.
- Valid — the defect is real; cite the code path that proves it.
- False positive — the claim doesn't hold; show why (the invariant that protects it, the version that ships the fix, the config that makes it safe).
- Stale — already fixed by a later commit on the branch; name the commit.
- Nit — real but cosmetic; fix only if trivial.
Never fix anything you haven't verified.
Step 3 — Verdict table
| # | Source | Location | Claim | Verdict | Proof | Proposed fix |
Order: valid first. Keep claims and proofs to one line each; the user decides from this table.
Step 4 — Fix
On approval (or immediately when invoked with --fix):
- Minimal, targeted fixes only — exactly what the finding requires. If the review asked for one line, change one line; do not "improve" neighbors.
- Before each fix, check it introduces no regression or behavior change beyond the finding.
- Commit atomically by concern, per global commit rules. Push only when asked — except under the babysit loop below, where push is part of the cycle.
- Where useful, draft reply comments (fix reference for valid ones, a short justification for false positives).
Babysit loop
While a PR is open and bots keep posting, run this skill on a loop instead of manually re-checking:
/loop 10m /triage-reviews --fixEach round: fetch comments newer than the last round, triage, fix, commit, push, then check gh pr checks. If checks are failing, diagnose per /fix-ci. Stop the loop when checks are green and no unresolved comments remain.
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
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.

