address-pr-feedback

name	address-pr-feedback
description	Comprehensively addresses PR feedback by fetching all comments, deploying parallel agents for critical analysis of each suggestion, making implementation decisions, then systematically implementing fixes with incremental commits and browser validation. Use when you need to systematically process and implement all PR review feedback with due diligence validation.
argument-hint	<pr-number|url> [--dry-run] [--auto-push] [--no-browser]
disable-model-invocation	true
allowed-tools	["AskUserQuestion","Read","Edit","Glob","Grep","Bash(git *)","Bash(gh *)","Agent","mcp__claude-in-chrome__tabs_context_mcp","mcp__claude-in-chrome__tabs_create_mcp","mcp__claude-in-chrome__navigate","mcp__claude-in-chrome__read_page","mcp__claude-in-chrome__find","mcp__claude-in-chrome__computer"]

Address PR Feedback

Comprehensive PR review workflow that fetches all comments, uses parallel agents for critical analysis, makes implementation decisions, then systematically addresses valid concerns with incremental commits and browser validation.

Preferences

On startup, use Read to load ~/.claude/skills/address-pr-feedback/preferences.md. If file doesn't exist, use defaults.

Context

On startup, use Bash to detect: current git branch, git status, repo name, and check for localhost development server. Skip any that fail.

Command routing

Check $ARGUMENTS:

• help → display help then stop
• config → interactive setup then stop
• reset → delete preferences file, confirm, stop
• PR number/URL with optional flags → run the workflow

Help

Address PR Feedback — Systematic PR review implementation with agent validation

Usage:
  /address-pr-feedback <pr-number|url>              Process all PR feedback
  /address-pr-feedback #123 --dry-run              Analyze only, no changes
  /address-pr-feedback #123 --auto-push            Skip push confirmation
  /address-pr-feedback #123 --no-browser           Skip browser validation
  /address-pr-feedback config                      Set preferences
  /address-pr-feedback reset                       Clear preferences
  /address-pr-feedback help                        This help

Examples:
  /address-pr-feedback #123                        Full workflow for PR 123
  /address-pr-feedback https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/456
  /address-pr-feedback #789 --dry-run --no-browser

Current preferences:
  localhost-port: 3000 (or "auto-detect")
  browser-validation: enabled (or "disabled")  
  auto-commit: true (or "false")
  agent-analysis: parallel (or "sequential")

Config

Use AskUserQuestion to collect:

• Q1: Default localhost port — 3000, 3001, 4000, auto-detect
• Q2: Browser validation — Always validate, Skip for non-UI changes, Always skip
• Q3: Commit behavior — Auto-commit after each fix, Ask before each commit
• Q4: Agent analysis — Parallel (faster), Sequential (more thorough)

Save responses to ~/.claude/skills/address-pr-feedback/preferences.md.

Reset

Delete ~/.claude/skills/address-pr-feedback/preferences.md and confirm: "Preferences cleared. Using defaults."

First-time detection

If no preferences file exists, show:

First time using /address-pr-feedback? Run /address-pr-feedback config to set defaults, or just continue with sensible defaults.

Then proceed with the workflow.

Workflow

1. Gather PR context

• Parse PR number/URL from $ARGUMENTS
• Use gh pr view <number> --repo <repo> --json comments,files,title,body to fetch all data
• Check git status and current branch
• Validate we're in the right repository

2. Organize feedback table

Create table with all comments:

#	Author	File:Line	Comment
1	reviewer1	src/app.ts:42	This function could be optimized...
2	claude	README.md:15	Missing installation steps

Display table to user for visibility.

3. Deploy parallel agents

For each comment row:

• Spawn Agent with specific analysis prompt
• Task: "Critically analyze this PR comment. Is it valid? What's the implementation effort? What are the risks if ignored?"
• Run all agents in parallel for efficiency
• Collect responses when complete

4. Collect agent analysis

Create enhanced table:

#	Author	File:Line	Comment	Agent Opinion	Implementation Effort
1	reviewer1	src/app.ts:42	This function...	Valid concern, performance impact	Medium - refactor needed
2	claude	README.md:15	Missing steps	Critical for users	Low - add 3 lines

5. Make implementation decisions

Review agent analysis and decide what to address:

#	Action	Reasoning	Change Summary
1	✅ Address	Performance critical, user-facing	Refactor function, add caching
2	✅ Address	Documentation gap blocks users	Add installation section
3	❌ Skip	Edge case, minimal value	N/A

Ask user to confirm the implementation plan before proceeding.

6. Implement fixes incrementally

For each ✅ item:

1. Make the change - Edit files as needed
2. Validate syntax - Run npm run typecheck or equivalent
3. Browser test - Navigate to localhost, verify the change works
4. Clean commit - git add <specific-files> and git commit -m "fix: <specific-issue>"
5. Progress update - Mark item complete, move to next

Stop and ask user if any change seems complex or risky.

7. Final verification & summary

• Complete browser test - Full app walkthrough on localhost
• Run all checks - TypeScript, ESLint, tests if available
• Summary table - Show what was completed

Item	Status	Files Changed	Commit
Function optimization	✅ Done	src/app.ts	abc1234
README updates	✅ Done	README.md	def5678

8. Reply to comment threads

For each ✅ addressed item with a specific comment ID:

• Use GitHub API to add reply to the original comment thread
• NEVER edit original reviewer comments - always add replies
• Format: gh api repos/<org>/<repo>/pulls/<pr>/comments --method POST --field body="✅ **FIXED** in commit [SHA](link)" --field in_reply_to=<comment_id>
• One reply per comment thread showing exactly which commit addressed the feedback

9. Push changes

• Show git log --oneline -n <count> of new commits
• Ask for push confirmation (unless --auto-push flag used)
• git push origin <current-branch>
• Report success and suggest next actions (merge, request re-review)

Flag handling

• --dry-run - Stop after step 5 (implementation decisions), don't make changes
• --auto-push - Skip final push confirmation in step 8
• --no-browser - Skip browser validation in step 6, only run syntax checks

Error handling

• No PR comments found - Report "No feedback to address" and exit gracefully
• Agent spawn failures - Continue with manual analysis for failed items
• Browser validation fails - Stop, show error, ask user how to proceed
• Git conflicts - Stop, guide user to resolve, offer to resume

Principles

1. One commit per logical fix - Each addressed comment gets its own clean commit with descriptive message
2. Always validate before proceeding - Browser test after every change, TypeScript check before commits
3. Fail fast on complexity - If a change seems large or risky, stop and ask user for guidance
4. Preserve agent analysis - Show tables throughout so user can see the reasoning behind decisions
5. Non-destructive by default - Use --dry-run to analyze first, then implement with full visibility
6. Never edit original reviewer comments - Always add replies to comment threads, never modify someone else's feedback