coderabbit-core-workflow-b

Tune CodeRabbit review configuration: learnings, code guidelines, and noise reduction. Use when fine-tuning review quality, training CodeRabbit with team preferences, adding code guidelines, or reducing false positives. Trigger with phrases like "coderabbit tune reviews", "coderabbit learnings", "coderabbit guidelines", "reduce coderabbit noise", "coderabbit false positives".

Jump to install

Repository: jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skills
Last source activity: July 17, 2026 at 22:18
Detected SKILL.md language: English
Stars: 2,604
Forks: 378

Install options

The review-first prompt is selected by default. You can switch to a direct command or download a local copy.

Review the source files

Read SKILL.md and any companion files shown by SkillsMP before deciding whether to install.

Back to search Back to installation

name	coderabbit-core-workflow-b
description	Tune CodeRabbit review configuration: learnings, code guidelines, and noise reduction. Use when fine-tuning review quality, training CodeRabbit with team preferences, adding code guidelines, or reducing false positives. Trigger with phrases like "coderabbit tune reviews", "coderabbit learnings", "coderabbit guidelines", "reduce coderabbit noise", "coderabbit false positives".
allowed-tools	Read, Write, Edit, Bash(gh:*), Grep
version	1.11.0
license	MIT
author	Jeremy Longshore <jeremy@intentsolutions.io>
tags	["saas","coderabbit","workflow","tuning","learnings"]
compatibility	Designed for Claude Code, also compatible with Codex and OpenClaw

CodeRabbit Core Workflow B: Learnings & Tuning

Overview

After initial CodeRabbit setup (Workflow A), this skill covers tuning review quality through learnings, code guidelines, tone customization, and noise reduction. CodeRabbit improves over time by learning from your team's feedback patterns and custom rules.

Prerequisites

CodeRabbit installed and producing reviews (see coderabbit-core-workflow-a)
Several PRs worth of review history
Understanding of team coding standards

Instructions

Step 1: Configure Code Guidelines

CodeRabbit automatically detects coding rules from standard config files in your repo. It also reads AI agent configuration files for additional context.

# Files CodeRabbit auto-detects for coding rules:
# - .eslintrc.* / eslint.config.*     (JavaScript/TypeScript rules)
# - .prettierrc / prettier.config.*   (Formatting rules)
# - biome.json / biome.jsonc          (Biome linter rules)
# - .cursorrules                      (Cursor AI rules)
# - CLAUDE.md                         (Claude Code instructions)
# - .editorconfig                     (Editor settings)
# - .rubocop.yml                      (Ruby style)
# - ruff.toml / pyproject.toml        (Python rules)

# Add custom guidelines file:
# Create docs/CODING_STANDARDS.md with your team's rules
# Then reference it in .coderabbit.yaml:

# .coderabbit.yaml - Custom code guidelines
reviews:
  knowledge_base:
    code_guidelines:
      auto_detection: true          # Auto-detect from config files
      custom_patterns:
        - "docs/CODING_STANDARDS.md"
        - "docs/SECURITY_POLICY.md"
        - "team/code-style.txt"

# When CodeRabbit gives feedback you disagree with, reply:
"We intentionally use default exports in this project for Next.js pages.
Please don't flag default exports in files under src/pages/."

# CodeRabbit remembers this preference for future reviews.

# When you want to reinforce a pattern, reply positively:
"Good catch! We always want to flag missing error boundaries in React components."

# View current learnings in the CodeRabbit dashboard:
# app.coderabbit.ai > Organization > Learnings

# .coderabbit.yaml - Tone configuration
tone_instructions: |
  Be concise and direct. Skip pleasantries.
  Use bullet points for multiple suggestions.
  Include code examples for non-obvious fixes.
  Rate severity as: Critical > Warning > Suggestion > Nitpick.

# Review profiles control comment volume:
reviews:
  profile: "chill"       # Fewer comments, only significant issues
  # profile: "assertive" # Balanced (default, recommended for most teams)

# Fun tone options (if your team appreciates them):
# tone_instructions: "Review like a wise but slightly sarcastic senior engineer."
# tone_instructions: "You must talk like a pirate. Arr!"

# .coderabbit.yaml - Noise reduction strategies
reviews:
  # Skip paths that generate noise
  path_filters:
    - "!**/*.lock"
    - "!**/*.snap"
    - "!**/*.generated.*"
    - "!**/migrations/*.sql"    # DB migrations are reviewed manually
    - "!**/__mocks__/**"
    - "!**/fixtures/**"
    - "!**/testdata/**"

  # Give context to prevent misguided comments
  path_instructions:
    - path: "src/legacy/**"
      instructions: |
        This is legacy code being incrementally migrated.
        Only flag security issues and bugs. Do NOT suggest refactoring.
        Do NOT comment on naming conventions or code style.

    - path: "src/generated/**"
      instructions: |
        This code is auto-generated by protobuf/GraphQL codegen.
        Only review if there are manual modifications (check git blame).
        Skip style and structure comments entirely.

    - path: "scripts/**"
      instructions: |
        These are one-off scripts. Do not enforce production code standards.
        Only flag: security issues, destructive operations without confirmation,
        and missing error handling on file/network operations.

  # Skip PRs from automated tools
  auto_review:
    ignore_title_keywords:
      - "chore: bump"
      - "chore(deps)"
      - "Bump version"
      - "auto-generated"

# Try different profiles to find the right signal-to-noise ratio:
#
# Week 1-2: Run "assertive" (default)
# - Track: comments per PR, acceptance rate, developer satisfaction
#
# Week 3-4: Switch to "chill"
# - Compare same metrics
#
# Decision framework:
# - Acceptance rate < 30%? → Profile too aggressive, switch to chill
# - Acceptance rate > 70%? → Reviews are valued, keep current profile
# - Developers ignoring reviews? → Too many nitpicks, switch to chill
# - Security issues slipping through? → Switch to assertive

set -euo pipefail
# Check CodeRabbit comment acceptance rate on recent PRs
ORG="your-org"
REPO="your-repo"

echo "=== CodeRabbit Review Effectiveness ==="
for PR in $(gh api "repos/$ORG/$REPO/pulls?state=closed&per_page=20" --jq '.[].number'); do
  TOTAL=$(gh api "repos/$ORG/$REPO/pulls/$PR/comments" \
    --jq '[.[] | select(.user.login=="coderabbitai[bot]")] | length' 2>/dev/null)
  [ "$TOTAL" -gt 0 ] && echo "PR #$PR: $TOTAL CodeRabbit comments"
done

Issue	Cause	Solution
Reviews ignore custom rules	Guidelines file not referenced	Add path to `custom_patterns` in config
Learnings not sticking	Organization-level vs repo-level	Check learnings scope in dashboard
Too few comments	Profile set to "chill"	Switch to "assertive" for more thorough reviews
Same issue flagged repeatedly	Learning not created	Reply explicitly stating the preference
Tone instructions ignored	YAML formatting issue	Ensure `tone_instructions` is a proper string