agentleFS
revisit-studiesrevisit-studies/study/.agents/skills/babysit/SKILL.md

babysit

Skill46 starsChanged 45 days agoBSD-3-ClauseView on GitHub

Continuously shepherd one GitHub pull request to a verified green state by addressing Codex automated review threads, fixing in-scope CI failures, and monitoring the exact current head until the stopping conditions hold. Use when the user says to babysit, shepherd, or keep watching a PR until it is ready; do not use for a one-time status check or to merge a PR.

44 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use oh-my-issues, what-the and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • tuliosalustiano27Skill

    oh-my-issues

    Cluster a GitHub issue backlog by root cause into a small set of plan-master issues, redirect children with a standardized comment, and bundle architectural-fix PRs that close clusters atomically. Use when an issue tracker has accumulated dozens of reports that share underlying defects, when asked to triage / consolidate / cluster / dedupe issues, when asked to build a plan series or roadmap from open issues, or when routing a new incoming bug into an existing plan.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • tuliosalustiano27Skill

    what-the

    What the? Use when the user wants a plain-English breakdown of something technical — the who, what, where, why, and when.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • Tsumugii24Skill

    split-to-prs

    Split current work into small reviewable PRs. Use when the user asks to split a chat, set of changes, branch, or PR.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • mukcoSkill

    principles

    General software engineering principles — DRY, SOLID, YAGNI, KISS, naming, code smells, and refactoring. Language-agnostic. Use alongside language-specific skills.

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • PandelisZSkill

    update-cli-config

    View and modify Cursor CLI configuration settings in ~/.cursor/cli-config.json. Use when the user wants to change CLI settings, configure permissions, switch approval mode, enable vim mode, toggle display options, configure sandbox, or manage any CLI preferences.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • 32103210Skill

    migrate-to-skills

    Convert 'Applied intelligently' Cursor rules (.cursor/rules/*.mdc) and slash commands (.cursor/commands/*.md) to Agent Skills format (.cursor/skills/). Use when you want to migrate rules or commands to skills, convert .mdc rules to SKILL.md format, or consolidate commands into the skills directory.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

19 rules. 0 are common, 18 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 42 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 18

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  • could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
  1. Very specific:

    When the user explicitly invokes $babysit, says to babysit or keep watching a PR, or otherwise requests persistence until a stated end …

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    If goal-management tools are available, inspect the current goal.

    line 15
  3. Distinctive:

    Do not create a goal for an ordinary one-time PR status or review request that happened to trigger the skill implicitly.

    line 20
  4. Distinctive:

    Add or update focused tests when the fix needs regression coverage.

    line 27
  5. Distinctive:

    Commit and push those repairs without rewriting branch history.

    line 28
  6. Distinctive:

    Treat a thread as Codex-generated only when its author or application metadata clearly identifies the configured Codex/OpenAI automated …

    line 42
  7. Distinctive:

    If the PR is closed, merged, inaccessible, or does not have a safely writable branch, stop making changes and report the terminal condition …

    line 45
  8. Distinctive:

    If the finding remains valid, make the smallest complete fix and run focused validation.

    line 55
  9. Distinctive:

    If the current head already addresses it, or evidence shows it does not apply, reply with that concrete evidence.

    line 56
  10. Distinctive:

    After any push, refresh the PR head and restart review-thread and CI evaluation from the new SHA.

    line 58
  11. Distinctive:

    Do not broaden a narrow finding into speculative cleanup.

    line 60
  12. Distinctive:

    When a check fails:

    line 66
  13. Distinctive:

    Read the failing job and step logs.

    line 68
  14. Distinctive:

    Use bounded waits or monitoring tools and refresh on state changes.

    line 73
  15. Distinctive:

    Every in-scope Codex automated review thread is resolved, and no current-head Codex review still requests changes.

    line 84
  16. Distinctive:

    Every required check is successful or otherwise accepted by GitHub, every relevant head check is terminal, and none is failing, cancelled, …

    line 85
  17. Distinctive:

    All babysit repairs are committed and pushed, with no unpushed or unintended local changes.

    line 86
  18. Distinctive:

    When the contract holds, mark an active goal complete and report the PR URL, verified head SHA, resolved Codex thread count, final check …

    line 91
  19. Distinctive:

    If progress requires new authority, a product decision, credentials, secrets, access to an external system, or a destructive operation, …

    line 93

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 42 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

Babysit a Pull Request

Own the follow-through for one PR. Keep working across review and CI cycles; do not stop merely because a fix was pushed or one snapshot was green.

Start a Durable Objective

When the user explicitly invokes $babysit, says to babysit or keep watching a PR, or otherwise requests persistence until a stated end condition:

  1. Resolve the exact repository and PR from the supplied URL or number, or from the current branch.
  2. If goal-management tools are available, inspect the current goal. Continue a matching goal, create one when none exists, and do not replace a different active goal without user direction.
  3. Set the objective to babysit that exact PR without merging until the current head has no unresolved in-scope Codex review threads, all required and relevant CI is successful, all repairs are pushed, and the final verification is stable. Do not set a token budget unless the user requested one.

A skill cannot type a composer slash command on the user's behalf. Use the runtime's goal tools when exposed. If they are unavailable, run the same loop in the current turn and state that persistence across turns is not guaranteed.

Do not create a goal for an ordinary one-time PR status or review request that happened to trigger the skill implicitly.

Authority and Boundaries

An explicit babysit request authorizes the routine mutations needed to satisfy this workflow on the PR's existing branch:

  • Make minimal fixes for verified Codex findings or branch-caused CI failures.
  • Add or update focused tests when the fix needs regression coverage.
  • Commit and push those repairs without rewriting branch history.
  • Reply to and resolve verified Codex automated review threads after their concern is addressed or shown not to apply.
  • Retry a check once on an unchanged head when evidence identifies a transient infrastructure failure.

It does not authorize merging, approving, marking ready for review, changing the PR base, force-pushing, dismissing reviews, resolving human-authored threads, changing secrets, or performing production or deployment mutations. Obtain separate authorization for those actions.

Preserve unrelated local work. Use a clean isolated worktree at the exact PR head when the active checkout is dirty, belongs to another branch, or could be disrupted.

Establish the Live State

At the beginning of every cycle:

  • Refresh the PR's open/draft state, base and head refs, head SHA, mergeability, review decision, and check rollup. Fetch the exact refs before making repository-state claims.
  • Query GitHub review threads through GraphQL, including thread IDs, resolution and outdated state, file and line anchors, comment authors, bodies, timestamps, and URLs. Flat PR comments are not sufficient for determining unresolved thread state.
  • Treat a thread as Codex-generated only when its author or application metadata clearly identifies the configured Codex/OpenAI automated reviewer. Leave ambiguous or human-authored threads untouched and report them separately.
  • Identify required checks and every relevant check running on the current head. Never reuse a green result from an older SHA.

If the PR is closed, merged, inaccessible, or does not have a safely writable branch, stop making changes and report the terminal condition or permission blocker.

Reconciliation Loop

Repeat the following until the completion contract holds:

Handle Codex Review Threads

For each unresolved in-scope thread, inspect the current code and surrounding behavior rather than trusting the thread's age or outdated marker.

  • If the finding remains valid, make the smallest complete fix and run focused validation.
  • If the current head already addresses it, or evidence shows it does not apply, reply with that concrete evidence.
  • Resolve the thread only after the concern is addressed or rebutted. An outdated diff anchor alone is not proof of resolution.
  • After any push, refresh the PR head and restart review-thread and CI evaluation from the new SHA.

Do not broaden a narrow finding into speculative cleanup. Group only changes that belong to the same verified repair.

Drive CI to Green

Monitor checks on the current head. Treat queued, pending, in-progress, failed, timed-out, action-required, stale, and cancelled checks as non-green.

When a check fails:

  1. Read the failing job and step logs.
  2. Decide whether the failure is caused by the PR, a real base-branch problem, or transient infrastructure.
  3. For a branch-caused failure, reproduce it when practical, make the narrowest fix, run the relevant local validation, commit, and push.
  4. Retry only a verified transient failure, at most once per unchanged head. Do not repeatedly rerun an unchanged deterministic failure.

Use bounded waits or monitoring tools and refresh on state changes. Keep the user informed during long waits without producing repetitive unchanged updates.

Recheck After Automation Settles

Do not assume the absence of current comments means automated review is finished. If the PR exposes a pending Codex review request, review job, or other repository-specific completion signal, wait for it. Once checks and review automation appear settled, take a fresh final snapshot; any new commit, thread, review, or check restarts the loop.

Completion Contract

Complete successfully only when a final live read verifies all of the following against the same head SHA:

  • The PR is still open and the head SHA is unchanged across the final verification.
  • Every in-scope Codex automated review thread is resolved, and no current-head Codex review still requests changes.
  • Every required check is successful or otherwise accepted by GitHub, every relevant head check is terminal, and none is failing, cancelled, or pending.
  • All babysit repairs are committed and pushed, with no unpushed or unintended local changes.
  • A final refresh after CI and review automation settled found no new work.

Human-authored unresolved threads are outside the default mutation scope. Report them clearly and do not claim the PR is globally review-complete; they block completion only when the user asked to resolve all reviewers' threads.

When the contract holds, mark an active goal complete and report the PR URL, verified head SHA, resolved Codex thread count, final check state, mutations made, and anything explicitly left out of scope. Never merge as part of this skill.

If progress requires new authority, a product decision, credentials, secrets, access to an external system, or a destructive operation, request that input instead of guessing. Keep an active goal open unless the goal runtime's blocked criteria are actually met.

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.