address-pr-review

name	address-pr-review
description	Fetch and address GitHub PR review comments for the current branch. Trigger when: user asks to "address PR comments", "fix review feedback", "handle PR reviews", "review-pr", "address review", "fix PR comments", or any request to act on pull request review feedback. Also trigger when the user pastes a PR URL and asks to address its comments.

Review PR: Address GitHub Review Comments

Fetch unresolved review comments on the current branch's PR, analyze what each reviewer is asking for, and make the code changes.

Prerequisites

gh CLI must be installed and authenticated:

which gh
gh auth status

Workflow

Step 1: Get the PR for the current branch

gh pr view --json number,url,title,headRefName

If user provided a PR number or URL, use that instead:

gh pr view <number-or-url> --json number,url,title,headRefName

Step 2: Extract owner and repo

gh repo view --json owner,name --jq '"\(.owner.login) \(.name)"'

Step 3: Fetch unresolved review threads

Use GraphQL to get review threads with resolution status, file locations, and all comments:

gh api graphql -F owner='<owner>' -F repo='<repo>' -F pr='<number>' -f query='
query($owner: String!, $repo: String!, $pr: Int!) {
  repository(owner: $owner, name: $repo) {
    pullRequest(number: $pr) {
      reviewThreads(first: 100) {
        nodes {
          isResolved
          isOutdated
          path
          line
          startLine
          comments(first: 50) {
            nodes {
              body
              author { login }
              createdAt
              diffHunk
            }
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }
}
'

Filter to threads where isResolved: false and isOutdated: false. These are the active, unresolved comments that need attention.

Step 4: Process each thread

For each unresolved thread:

1. Read the file at path around the indicated line/startLine
2. Read the full comment thread — later replies may clarify, narrow, or withdraw the original request
3. Categorize the comment:
   • Actionable code change — reviewer requests a specific fix, refactor, rename, or improvement → make the change
   • Nit / style — minor style suggestion (naming, formatting) → make the change, these are quick
   • Question / discussion — reviewer is asking for context or debating an approach → skip, flag for the user to respond
   • Already addressed — the requested change is already present in the current code (comment may be stale even if thread isn't marked resolved) → skip, note it
4. Make the fix if actionable — edit the file at the relevant location
5. Track what was done and what was skipped

Step 5: Summary

After processing all threads, report:

• Addressed: list of changes made, with file paths and what was changed
• Skipped: threads that need human response (questions, design discussions), with the reviewer's comment quoted
• Already addressed: threads where the code already reflects the requested change

Handling Edge Cases

• Thread with multiple comments: read the entire thread — the last comment often supersedes or refines earlier ones
• Conflicting reviews: if two reviewers disagree, skip and flag for the user
• Comments on deleted lines: if isOutdated is false but the file/line no longer exists, skip and note it
• Large refactor requests: if a comment asks for a significant architectural change, describe what would be needed and ask the user before proceeding

Keywords

review, PR, pull request, comments, feedback, address, fix, review comments, code review, unresolved, github