inline-pr-comments

name	inline-pr-comments
description	Post a single consolidated PR review with summary and inline comments. Use this skill to deliver code review feedback as one unified review per run.

Consolidated PR Review Skill

Use this skill to submit code review feedback as a single consolidated GitHub review containing both the summary body and all inline comments.

When to Use

• After completing a code review (use with /claude-review, /claude-security-review, /claude-tob-review)
• When you have specific line-by-line feedback to deliver

Instructions

Submit one consolidated review per run using the GitHub API. Do NOT post inline comments individually. Each run produces a new review — nothing is overwritten.

Step 1: Fetch Prior Review Context

Before reviewing, read existing reviews and comments on the PR for context:

# Fetch existing reviews (summaries)
gh api --paginate "repos/$GITHUB_REPOSITORY/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/reviews" --jq '.[] | {user: .user.login, state: .state, body: .body}'

# Fetch inline review comments
gh api --paginate "repos/$GITHUB_REPOSITORY/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/comments" --jq '.[] | {user: .user.login, path: .path, line: .line, body: .body}'

# Fetch general PR discussion comments
gh api --paginate "repos/$GITHUB_REPOSITORY/issues/$PR_NUMBER/comments" --jq '.[] | {user: .user.login, body: .body}'

Use this context to:

• Skip issues already raised — don't re-flag something a prior review already pointed out
• Reference prior discussions — e.g. "As noted in the previous review, ..."
• Flag unresolved issues — if a prior review raised something that still isn't fixed, note it briefly (e.g. "Still unresolved from prior review: ...")
• Avoid contradictions — don't suggest the opposite of what a human reviewer requested

Re-fetch immediately before submitting. Other reviewers may be reviewing concurrently. Critically, the GitHub API does not expose a reviewer's draft/pending comments until they submit — so you can post a review seconds before a concurrent reviewer submits theirs and never have seen their notes. Re-run the fetch right before Step 4, and state the HEAD commit your review is based on in the body (e.g. "Reviewed at <sha>") so readers know the snapshot.

Step 2: Collect All Findings

Complete the full review. Collect:

• Summary — Overall assessment, architecture concerns, non-diff observations
• Inline comments — Specific issues on changed lines (path, line, body)

Step 3: Build Review JSON

Write a JSON file to /tmp/review.json:

{
  "body": "## Review Summary\n\nOverall assessment here.\n\n## Observations Outside This PR\n- `file:line`: description",
  "event": "COMMENT",
  "comments": [
    {
      "path": "src/file.ts",
      "line": 42,
      "body": "Issue description here"
    },
    {
      "path": "src/other.ts",
      "start_line": 10,
      "line": 15,
      "body": "Multi-line comment"
    }
  ]
}

Fields:

• body — Markdown review summary (required)
• event — Always "COMMENT" (never APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES)
• comments — Array of inline comment objects (can be empty if no inline findings)
  • path — File path relative to repo root
  • line — Line number in the NEW version of the file
  • start_line + line — For multi-line comments
  • body — Markdown-formatted feedback

Step 4: Submit the Review

gh api "repos/$GITHUB_REPOSITORY/pulls/$PR_NUMBER/reviews" --input /tmp/review.json

The GITHUB_REPOSITORY and PR_NUMBER environment variables are set by the CI workflow.

Limitations

• Inline comments can only target lines in the diff (changed/added lines)
• Comments targeting unchanged lines will cause the API call to fail
• If unsure whether a line is in the diff, put the finding in the summary body instead

Handling Non-Diff Findings

Issues in code NOT changed by the PR go in the review body under a dedicated section:

## Observations Outside This PR

- `src/utils/foo.ts:142`: Pre-existing null check missing
- `src/core/bar.ts:78-82`: Similar pattern to line 45 issue

Feedback Guidelines

Feedback Type	In Diff?	Where to Put It
Specific code issue	Yes	comments array entry for that line
Pattern repeated across files	Yes	First occurrence in comments + note others in body
Related issue found	No	body under "Observations Outside This PR"
Pre-existing bug discovered	No	body (consider separate issue if critical)
Overall architecture concern	N/A	body

Be concise. Group minor style issues together. Never use APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES.