agentleFS
Sign inStart free
lyh843lyh843/AgentSkills/skills/gh-address-comments/SKILL.md

gh-address-comments

Skill1 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Address actionable GitHub pull request review feedback. Use when the user wants to inspect unresolved review threads, requested changes, or inline review comments on a PR, then implement selected fixes. Use the GitHub app for PR metadata and flat comment reads, and use the bundled GraphQL script via `gh` whenever thread-level state, resolution status, or inline review context matters.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

16 rules. 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 28 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 11

    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
  1. Very specific:

    Run all gh commands with elevated network access.

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    If the user provides a repository and PR number or URL, use that directly.

    line 15
  3. Very specific:

    If the request is about the current branch PR, use local git context plus gh auth status and gh pr view --json number,url to resolve it.

    line 16
  4. Distinctive:

    Use the GitHub app from this plugin to fetch PR metadata and patch context when the repo and PR are known.

    line 18
  5. Very specific:

    Use the bundled scripts/fetch_comments.py workflow whenever the task depends on unresolved review threads, inline review locations, or …

    line 19
  6. Distinctive:

    Use connector-only comment reads only for lightweight top-level PR comment summaries.

    line 20
  7. Distinctive:

    If the user did not ask to fix everything, ask which threads to address.

    line 26
  8. Distinctive:

    If the user asks to fix everything, interpret that as all unresolved actionable threads and call out anything ambiguous.

    line 27
  9. Distinctive:

    Keep each code change traceable back to the thread or feedback cluster it addresses.

    line 29
  10. Distinctive:

    If a comment calls for explanation rather than code, draft the response rather than forcing a code change.

    line 30
  11. Distinctive:

    Do not reply on GitHub, resolve review threads, or submit a review unless the user explicitly asks for that write action.

    line 36
  12. Distinctive:

    If review comments conflict with each other or would cause a behavioral regression, surface the tradeoff before making changes.

    line 37
  13. Distinctive:

    If a comment is ambiguous, ask for clarification or draft a proposed response instead of guessing.

    line 38
  14. Distinctive:

    Do not treat flat PR comments from the connector as a complete representation of review-thread state.

    line 39
  15. Very specific:

    If gh hits auth or rate-limit issues mid-run, ask the user to re-authenticate and retry.

    line 40
  16. Very specific:

    If neither the connector nor gh can resolve the PR cleanly, tell the user whether the blocker is missing repository scope, missing PR …

    line 44

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 28 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.

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

GitHub PR Comment Handler

Use this skill when the user wants to work through requested changes on a GitHub pull request. Use the GitHub app from this plugin for PR metadata and patch context, but treat thread-aware review data as a gh api graphql problem because the connector comment surface is flat and does not preserve full review-thread state.

Run all gh commands with elevated network access. If CLI auth is required, confirm gh auth status first and ask the user to authenticate with gh auth login if it fails.

Workflow

  1. Resolve the PR.
    • If the user provides a repository and PR number or URL, use that directly.
    • If the request is about the current branch PR, use local git context plus gh auth status and gh pr view --json number,url to resolve it.
  2. Inspect review context with thread-aware reads.
    • Use the GitHub app from this plugin to fetch PR metadata and patch context when the repo and PR are known.
    • Use the bundled scripts/fetch_comments.py workflow whenever the task depends on unresolved review threads, inline review locations, or resolution state. That script fetches reviewThreads, isResolved, isOutdated, and file and line anchors that the connector comment surface does not preserve.
    • Use connector-only comment reads only for lightweight top-level PR comment summaries.
  3. Cluster actionable review threads.
    • Group comments by file or behavior area.
    • Separate actionable change requests from informational comments, approvals, already-resolved threads, and duplicates.
  4. Confirm scope before editing.
    • Present numbered actionable threads with a one-line summary of the required change.
    • If the user did not ask to fix everything, ask which threads to address.
    • If the user asks to fix everything, interpret that as all unresolved actionable threads and call out anything ambiguous.
  5. Implement the selected fixes locally.
    • Keep each code change traceable back to the thread or feedback cluster it addresses.
    • If a comment calls for explanation rather than code, draft the response rather than forcing a code change.
  6. Summarize the result.
    • List which threads were addressed, which were intentionally left open, and what tests or checks support the change.

Write Safety

  • Do not reply on GitHub, resolve review threads, or submit a review unless the user explicitly asks for that write action.
  • If review comments conflict with each other or would cause a behavioral regression, surface the tradeoff before making changes.
  • If a comment is ambiguous, ask for clarification or draft a proposed response instead of guessing.
  • Do not treat flat PR comments from the connector as a complete representation of review-thread state.
  • If gh hits auth or rate-limit issues mid-run, ask the user to re-authenticate and retry.

Fallback

If neither the connector nor gh can resolve the PR cleanly, tell the user whether the blocker is missing repository scope, missing PR context, or CLI authentication, then ask for the missing repo or PR identifier or for a refreshed gh login.

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.

Check your setup, free