| name | qodo-pr-resolver |
| description | Use when the user wants to review Qodo PR feedback or fix code review comments. Capabilities: view issues by severity, apply fixes interactively or in batch, reply to inline comments, post fix summaries (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, Gerrit) |
| triggers | ["qodo.?pr.?resolver","pr.?resolver","resolve.?pr","qodo.?fix","fix.?qodo","qodo.?review","review.?qodo","qodo.?issues?","show.?qodo","get.?qodo","qodo.?resolve"] |
Qodo PR Resolver
Fetch Qodo review issues for your current branch's PR/MR, fix them interactively or in batch, and reply to each inline comment with the decision. Supports GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, and Gerrit.
Prerequisites
Required Tools:
- Git - For branch operations
- Git Provider CLI - One of:
gh (GitHub), glab (GitLab), curl (Bitbucket/Gerrit), or az (Azure DevOps)
Installation and authentication details: See providers.md for provider-specific setup instructions.
Required Context:
- Must be in a git repository
- Repository must be hosted on a supported git provider (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, or Gerrit)
- Current branch must have an open PR/MR (or Gerrit change)
- PR/MR must have been reviewed by Qodo (pr-agent-pro bot, qodo-merge[bot], etc.)
Quick Check:
git --version
git remote get-url origin
See providers.md for provider-specific verification commands.
Understanding Qodo Reviews
Qodo (formerly Codium AI) is an AI-powered code review tool that analyzes PRs/MRs with compliance checks, bug detection, and code quality suggestions.
Bot Identifiers
Look for comments from: pr-agent-pro, pr-agent-pro-staging, qodo-merge[bot], qodo-ai[bot]
Review Comment Types
- PR Compliance Guide 🔍 - Security/ticket/custom compliance with 🟢/🟡/🔴/⚪ indicators
- PR Code Suggestions ✨ - Categorized improvements with importance ratings
- Code Review by Qodo - Structured issues with 🐞/📘/📎 sections and agent prompts (most detailed)
Instructions
When the user asks for a code review, to see Qodo issues, or fix Qodo comments:
Step 0: Check code push status
Check for uncommitted changes, unpushed commits, and get the current branch.
Note: Only consider tracked files when checking for uncommitted changes. Untracked files (scripts, local configs, etc.) that are not part of the repository should be ignored. Use git diff --name-only and git diff --cached --name-only rather than git status --porcelain which includes untracked files.
Scenario A: Uncommitted changes exist
- Inform: "⚠️ You have uncommitted changes. These won't be included in the Qodo review."
- Ask: "Would you like to commit and push them first?"
- If yes: Wait for user action, then proceed to Step 1
- If no: Warn "Proceeding with review of pushed code only" and continue to Step 1
Scenario B: Unpushed commits exist
(no uncommitted changes)
- Inform: "⚠️ You have N unpushed commits. Qodo hasn't reviewed them yet."
- Ask: "Would you like to push them now?"
- If yes: Execute
git push, inform "Pushed! Qodo will review shortly." Record internally JUST_PUSHED = true. Continue to Step 1 (the Wait for Qodo review flow in Step 3a will handle the waiting).
- If no: Warn "Proceeding with existing PR review" and continue to Step 1
Scenario C: Everything pushed
(both uncommitted changes and unpushed commits are empty)
Step 1: Detect git provider
Detect git provider from the remote URL (git remote get-url origin).
See providers.md for provider detection patterns. For Gerrit, also check for .gitreview file, port 29418 in remote URL, or googlesource.com — see gerrit.md.
Step 2: Find the open PR/MR
Find the open PR/MR for this branch using the provider's CLI.
See providers.md § Find Open PR/MR for provider-specific commands. For Gerrit, look up the change using the Change-Id from the HEAD commit message — see gerrit.md § Find Open Change.
Step 3: Get Qodo review comments
Get the Qodo review comments using the provider's CLI.
Qodo typically posts both a summary comment (PR-level, containing all issues) and inline review comments (one per issue, attached to specific lines of code). You must fetch both.
See providers.md § Fetch Review Comments for provider-specific commands.
Look for comments where the author is "qodo-merge[bot]", "pr-agent-pro", "pr-agent-pro-staging" or similar Qodo bot name.
Gerrit note: Qodo posts as tagged human comments via /comments with tag: "autogenerated:qodo". Also check change messages (/messages) for the summary comment. Filter by tag field or bot username. See gerrit.md § Fetch Review Comments.
Step 3a: Check if review is ready / Wait for Qodo review
Check if the Qodo review is complete:
- If any comment contains "Come back again in a few minutes" or "An AI review agent is analysing this pull request", the review is still running
- If no Qodo bot comments are found at all, the review hasn't started yet
If the review is not ready (in progress, not started, or we just pushed/created a PR):
- Ask using AskUserQuestion: "⏳ Qodo review is not ready yet. Would you like to wait for it to complete?"
- Options: "Wait for review" (Recommended) / "Exit and come back later"
- If "Exit and come back later": Inform "Run this skill again in a few minutes once Qodo has reviewed the PR." Exit skill.
- If "Wait for review":
- Inform: "Monitoring for Qodo review completion (checking every 30 seconds)..."
- Use the Monitor tool to poll for review completion:
description: "Waiting for Qodo review on PR #"
timeout_ms: 600000 (10 minutes)
persistent: false
command: A polling script that runs in a while true; do ... sleep 30; done loop. The script should use the same provider-specific comment-fetch commands from Step 3 (Fetch Review Comments) to check for Qodo bot comments. If Qodo comments are found AND they do not contain "Come back again in a few minutes" or "An AI review agent is analysing this pull request", output REVIEW_COMPLETE and exit. Use || true on API calls for transient failure resilience.
- When the Monitor emits
REVIEW_COMPLETE: Inform "Qodo review is ready!" and return to Step 3 to fetch and parse the review comments normally.
- If the Monitor times out (10 minutes): Inform "Qodo review hasn't appeared yet. You can run this skill again later." Exit skill.
If the review is ready (Qodo comments found, no "in progress" markers): Proceed directly to Step 3b.
Step 3b: Deduplicate issues
Deduplicate issues across summary and inline comments:
- Qodo posts each issue in two places: once in the summary comment (PR-level) and once as an inline review comment (attached to the specific code line). These will share the same issue title.
- Qodo may also post multiple summary comments (Compliance Guide, Code Suggestions, Code Review, etc.) where issues can overlap with slightly different wording.
- Deduplicate by matching on issue title (primary key - the same title means the same issue):
- If an issue appears in both the summary comment and as an inline comment, merge them into a single issue
- Prefer the inline comment for file location (it has the exact line context)
- Prefer the summary comment for severity, type, and agent prompt (it is more detailed)
- IMPORTANT: Preserve each issue's inline review comment ID — you will need it later (Step 8) to reply directly to that comment with the decision
- Also deduplicate across multiple summary comments by location (file path + line numbers) as a secondary key
- If the same issue appears in multiple places, combine the agent prompts
Gerrit deduplication: Qodo inline comments contain an Agent Prompt section (rendered as plain text — Gerrit doesn't support expandable blocks) with detailed fix instructions. When deduplicating, preserve the Agent Prompt from each unique finding.
Step 4: Parse and display the issues
- Extract the review body/comments from Qodo's review
- Parse out individual issues/suggestions
- IMPORTANT: Preserve Qodo's exact issue titles verbatim — do not rename, paraphrase, or summarize them. Use the title exactly as Qodo wrote it.
- IMPORTANT: Preserve Qodo's original ordering — display issues in the same order Qodo listed them. Qodo already orders by severity.
- Extract location, issue description, and suggested fix
- Extract the agent prompt from Qodo's suggestion (the description of what needs to be fixed)
Severity mapping
Derive severity from Qodo's action level and position:
-
Action level determines severity range:
- "Action required" issues → Can only be 🔴 CRITICAL or 🟠 HIGH
- "Review recommended" / "Remediation recommended" issues → Can only be 🟡 MEDIUM or ⚪ LOW
- "Other" / "Advisory comments" issues → Always ⚪ LOW (lowest priority)
-
Qodo's position within each action level determines the specific severity:
- Group issues by action level ("Action required" vs "Review recommended" vs "Other")
- Within "Action required" and "Review recommended" groups: earlier positions → higher severity, later positions → lower severity
- Split point: roughly first half of each group gets the higher severity, second half gets the lower
- All "Other" issues are treated as ⚪ LOW regardless of position
Example: 7 "Action required" issues would be split as:
- Issues 1-3: 🔴 CRITICAL
- Issues 4-7: 🟠 HIGH
- Result: No MEDIUM or LOW issues (because there are no "Review recommended" or "Other" issues)
Example: 5 "Action required" + 3 "Review recommended" + 2 "Other" issues would be split as:
- Issues 1-2 or 1-3: 🔴 CRITICAL (first ~half of "Action required")
- Issues 3-5 or 4-5: 🟠 HIGH (second ~half of "Action required")
- Issues 6-7: 🟡 MEDIUM (first ~half of "Review recommended")
- Issue 8: ⚪ LOW (second ~half of "Review recommended")
- Issues 9-10: ⚪ LOW (all "Other" issues)
Action guidelines:
- 🔴 CRITICAL / 🟠 HIGH ("Action required"): Always "Fix"
- 🟡 MEDIUM ("Review recommended"): Usually "Fix", can "Defer" if low impact
- ⚪ LOW ("Review recommended" or "Other"): Can be "Defer" unless quick to fix; "Other" issues are lowest priority
Output format
IMPORTANT: Use actual Unicode emoji characters (e.g. 🔴, 🟠, 📘, ⛨, ⚙), NOT GitHub-style shortcodes (:red_circle:, :books:, :shield:). Shortcodes do not render in terminal environments.
Display as a markdown table in Qodo's exact original ordering (do NOT reorder by severity - Qodo's order IS the severity ranking):
Qodo Issues for PR #123: [PR Title]
| # | Severity | Issue Title | Issue Details | Type | Action |
|---|----------|-------------|---------------|------|--------|
| 1 | 🔴 CRITICAL | Insecure authentication check | • **Location:** src/auth/service.py:42<br><br>• **Issue:** Authorization logic is inverted | 🐞 Bug ⛨ Security | Fix |
| 2 | 🔴 CRITICAL | Missing input validation | • **Location:** src/api/handlers.py:156<br><br>• **Issue:** User input not sanitized before database query | 📘 Rule violation ⛯ Reliability | Fix |
| 3 | 🟠 HIGH | Database query not awaited | • **Location:** src/db/repository.py:89<br><br>• **Issue:** Async call missing await keyword | 🐞 Bug ✓ Correctness | Fix |
Step 5: Ask user for fix preference
After displaying the table, ask the user how they want to proceed using AskUserQuestion:
Options:
- 🔍 "Review each issue" - Review and approve/defer each issue individually (recommended for careful review)
- ⚡ "Auto-fix all" - Automatically apply all fixes marked as "Fix" without individual approval (faster, but less control)
- ❌ "Cancel" - Exit without making changes
Based on the user's choice:
- If "Review each issue": Proceed to Step 6 (manual review)
- If "Auto-fix all": Skip to Step 7 (auto-fix mode - apply all "Fix" issues automatically using Qodo's agent prompts)
- If "Cancel": Exit the skill
Step 6: Review and fix issues (manual mode)
If "Review each issue" was selected:
- For each issue marked as "Fix" (starting with CRITICAL):
- Read the relevant file(s) to understand the current code
- Implement the fix by executing the Qodo agent prompt as a direct instruction. The agent prompt is the fix specification — follow it literally, do not reinterpret or improvise a different solution. Only deviate if the prompt is clearly outdated relative to the current code (e.g. references lines that no longer exist).
- Calculate the proposed fix in memory (DO NOT use Edit or Write tool yet)
- Present the fix and ask for approval in a SINGLE step:
- Show a brief header with issue title and location
- Show Qodo's agent prompt in full so the user can verify the fix matches it
- Display current code snippet
- Display proposed change as markdown diff
- Immediately use AskUserQuestion with these options:
- ✅ "Apply fix" - Apply the proposed change
- ⏭️ "Defer" - Skip this issue (will prompt for reason)
- 🔧 "Modify" - User wants to adjust the fix first
- WAIT for user's choice via AskUserQuestion
- If "Apply fix" selected:
- Apply change using Edit tool (or Write if creating new file)
- GitHub / GitLab / Bitbucket / Azure DevOps: Git commit the fix:
git add <modified-files> && git commit -m "fix: <issue title>"
- Gerrit: Do NOT commit yet — stage the change (
git add <modified-files>) but wait until all fixes are applied, then amend into a single commit (see Gerrit note below)
- Confirm: "✅ Fix applied!"
- Mark issue as completed
- If "Defer" selected:
- Ask for deferral reason using AskUserQuestion
- Record reason and move to next issue
- If "Modify" selected:
- Inform user they can make changes manually
- Move to next issue
- Continue until all "Fix" issues are addressed or the user decides to stop
- After all fixes are applied, reply to all Qodo inline comments in one batch (see Step 8)
Gerrit commit strategy: In Gerrit, each commit becomes a separate change. To keep all fixes as a single new patchset on the existing change:
- Apply all fixes (Edit tool) and stage them (
git add)
- After ALL fixes are done, amend the original commit:
git commit --amend --no-edit
- Push once in Step 9
Do NOT create individual commits per fix for Gerrit.
Important notes
Single-step approval with AskUserQuestion:
- NO native Edit UI (no persistent permissions possible)
- Each fix requires explicit approval via custom question
- Clearer options, no risk of accidental auto-approval
CRITICAL: Single validation only - do NOT show the diff separately and then ask. Combine the diff display and the question into ONE message. The user should see: brief context → current code → proposed diff → AskUserQuestion, all at once.
Example: Show location, Qodo's guidance, current code, proposed diff, then AskUserQuestion with options (✅ Apply fix / ⏭️ Defer / 🔧 Modify). Wait for user choice, apply via Edit tool if approved.
Step 7: Auto-fix mode
If "Auto-fix all" was selected:
- For each issue marked as "Fix" (starting with CRITICAL):
- Read the relevant file(s) to understand the current code
- Implement the fix by executing the Qodo agent prompt as a direct instruction. The agent prompt is the fix specification — follow it literally, do not reinterpret or improvise a different solution. Only deviate if the prompt is clearly outdated relative to the current code (e.g. references lines that no longer exist).
- Apply the fix using Edit tool
- GitHub / GitLab / Bitbucket / Azure DevOps: Git commit the fix:
git add <modified-files> && git commit -m "fix: <issue title>"
- Gerrit: Stage only (
git add <modified-files>) — do NOT commit yet
- Report each fix with the agent prompt that was followed:
✅ Fixed: [Issue Title] at [Location]
Agent prompt: [the Qodo agent prompt used]
- Mark issue as completed
- Gerrit: After ALL fixes are applied, amend into one commit:
git commit --amend --no-edit
- Reply to all Qodo inline comments in one batch (see Step 8)
- After all auto-fixes are applied, display summary:
- List of all issues that were fixed
- List of any issues that were skipped (with reasons)
Step 8: Post summary and reply to comments
REQUIRED: After all issues have been reviewed (fixed or deferred), ALWAYS post a comment summarizing the actions taken, even if all issues were deferred.
See providers.md § Post Summary Comment for provider-specific commands and summary format.
Gerrit: Batch the summary comment AND all inline replies into a single API call. This is more efficient and avoids multiple email notifications. Use the unified review endpoint with both message (summary) and comments (inline replies) — see gerrit.md § Post Summary Comment.
Important resolution rules for inline replies:
- Fixed issues: set
"unresolved": false (resolves the thread)
- Deferred issues: set
"unresolved": false (resolves the thread — the next Qodo review will re-evaluate)
After posting the summary, resolve the Qodo review comment:
Find the Qodo "Code Review by Qodo" comment and mark it as resolved or react to acknowledge it.
See providers.md § Resolve Qodo Review Comment for provider-specific commands.
If resolve fails (comment not found, API error), continue — the summary comment is the important part.
Step 9: Push to remote
If any fixes were applied (commits were created in Steps 6/7), ask the user if they want to push:
- If yes:
git push (for Gerrit: git push origin HEAD:refs/for/<target-branch> — this creates a new patchset on the existing change, matched by the Change-Id in the commit message. See gerrit.md § Push Changes)
- If no: Inform them they can push later with
git push
Important: If all issues were deferred, there are no commits to push — skip this step.
Step 9b: Handle draft PR status
Only run this step if DRAFT_PR_CREATED = true (a draft PR was created earlier in this session). Skip entirely if the PR already existed or was created as a regular PR.
- Ask using AskUserQuestion: "We opened this PR as a draft. Would you like to mark it as ready for review, or keep it as a draft?"
- Options: "Mark as ready for review" / "Keep as draft"
- If "Mark as ready for review": Use provider CLI to mark PR as ready (see providers.md § Mark PR Ready for Review). Inform: "PR marked as ready for review!"
- If "Keep as draft": Inform: "PR will remain as a draft. You can mark it ready later."
Step 10: Show PR URL
After completing all steps, always echo the PR/MR URL to the user so they can easily navigate to it. Use the PR URL detected in Step 2.
Example output: 🔗 PR: https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123
For Gerrit: 🔗 Change: https://<gerrit-host>/c/<project>/+/<change-number>
Special cases
Unsupported git provider
If the remote URL doesn't match GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, or Gerrit, inform the user and exit.
See providers.md § Error Handling for details.
No PR/MR exists
- Inform: "No PR/MR found for branch
<branch-name>. A PR is needed to trigger a Qodo review."
- For non-Gerrit providers, ask using AskUserQuestion: "How would you like to proceed?"
- "Open draft PR" (Recommended) — Create a draft PR since the code isn't finalized yet. Use provider CLI with draft flag (see providers.md § Create PR/MR). Record internally:
DRAFT_PR_CREATED = true and save the PR number/ID. Inform "Draft PR created!" then proceed to the Wait for Qodo review flow (Step 3a).
- "Open PR" — Create a regular (non-draft) PR. Use provider CLI without draft flag (see providers.md § Create PR/MR). Set
DRAFT_PR_CREATED = false. Inform "PR created!" then proceed to the Wait for Qodo review flow (Step 3a).
- "I'll open it manually" — Inform: "No problem! Open the PR yourself, then run this skill again once the PR exists and Qodo has reviewed it." Exit skill.
- For Gerrit, ask: "Would you like me to create a change?" If yes, push with
git push origin HEAD:refs/for/<branch> (see gerrit.md § Create Change). Then proceed to the Wait for Qodo review flow (Step 3a). If no, exit skill.
IMPORTANT: Do NOT proceed to Step 3b without a PR/MR. This skill only works with Qodo reviews, not manual reviews.
No Qodo review yet / Review in progress
Handled by Step 3a — proceeds to the Wait for Qodo review flow.
Missing CLI tool
If the detected provider's CLI is not installed, provide installation instructions and exit.
See providers.md § Error Handling for provider-specific installation commands.
Inline reply commands
Used per-issue in Steps 6 and 7 to reply to Qodo's inline comments:
Use the inline comment ID preserved during deduplication (Step 3b) to reply directly to Qodo's comment.
See providers.md § Reply to Inline Comments for provider-specific commands and reply format. For Gerrit, all replies go through a single unified endpoint and can be batched — see gerrit.md § Reply to Comments.
Keep replies short (one line). If a reply fails, log it and continue.