github-pr-review

name	github-pr-review
description	Use this skill when asked to address, fix, or resolve GitHub PR review comments. Covers fetching comments via gh CLI, applying code fixes one at a time, committing with commitlint-style messages, and resolving threads on GitHub.

GitHub PR Review Comment Resolution

A repeatable process for fetching unresolved PR review comments, evaluating their validity, applying fixes one at a time with proper commit messages, replying on GitHub with agent attribution, and then marking threads as resolved.

Important: if a thread was addressed, you must leave a GitHub reply on that thread before resolving it. Do not resolve addressed threads silently.

Prerequisites

• gh CLI authenticated (gh auth status)
• On the correct feature branch (git branch --show-current)
• Remote tracking set up (git push -u origin <branch>)

---

Step 1 — Fetch All Inline Review Comments

Get every inline comment (with author, line, and body) for a PR:

gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments \
  --jq '.[] | {id: .id, author: .user.login, path: .path, line: .line, body: .body}'

To also see top-level PR comments (non-inline):

gh pr view {pr} --repo {owner}/{repo} --json reviews,comments

---

Step 2 — Fetch GraphQL Thread IDs and Resolve Status

The REST API comment IDs cannot be used to resolve threads — you need the GraphQL PRRT_* node IDs:

gh api graphql -f query='
{
  repository(owner: "{owner}", name: "{repo}") {
    pullRequest(number: {pr}) {
      reviewThreads(first: 50) {
        nodes {
          id
          isResolved
          comments(first: 1) {
            nodes {
              databaseId
              body
            }
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }
}'

Map each databaseId (from REST) to its id (GraphQL PRRT_*) so you can reply and resolve it later.

---

Step 3 — Evaluate Each Comment

For every unresolved thread, decide:

Decision	Criteria
✅ Apply	Valid bug, inconsistency, performance issue, or clear improvement that fits the PR scope
⏭️ Skip	Out of scope, requires large refactor, contradicts existing patterns, or is purely stylistic preference
🗣️ Discuss	Ambiguous — surface to the human before acting

Work through comments one at a time, in priority order: bugs → performance → consistency → style.

---

Step 4 — Apply Fix and Commit

For each comment being addressed, make the minimal targeted code change, then commit immediately using commitlint-style messages:

Commit message format

<type>(<scope>): <short description>

Type	When to use
fix	Bug fix, incorrect behaviour
feat	New functionality added
perf	Performance improvement
refactor	Code restructure with no behaviour change
style	Formatting, naming (no logic change)
chore	Config, deps, tooling

Examples from this workflow:

git commit -m "refactor(blog): extract DEFAULT_PROMO_KEY constant for blackFridayBanner magic string"
git commit -m "perf(blog): set priority and eager loading for first 3 above-fold images to improve LCP"
git commit -m "feat(blog): add empty state when no posts are available for current locale"
git commit -m "fix(blog): use locale-aware date formatting with date-fns locale mapping"
git commit -m "feat(blog): add generateStaticParams and dynamicParams=false for static generation of all locale routes"
git commit -m "feat(blog): add generateMetadata with OG, Twitter, and alternates for SEO"

Commit command

git add <file> && git commit -m "<type>(<scope>): <description>"

---

Step 5 — Push to Remote

After all commits are done, push the branch:

git push origin <branch-name>

---

Step 6 — Reply on GitHub Before Resolving

This step is required for every addressed thread. If you fixed the issue, you must post a reply on the GitHub thread before resolving it.

Before resolving an addressed thread, leave a reply on the inline review comment that:

• states the thread was addressed
• identifies the harness and model that wrote the fix
• includes the commit SHA or a one-line summary whenever possible

Do not skip this reply step for addressed threads. The reply is part of the workflow, not an optional courtesy.

Use the current runtime's harness + model string exactly as it is known in context, for example:

• Zed - GPT-5.4
• Codex App - GPT-5.4
• Claude Code - Opus 4.6
• GPT-5.4 if the harness or software agent is not known

Reply format

<Harness> - <Model>

Addressed in <commit_sha>: <short summary>

Reply command

Use the REST comment_id / databaseId from Steps 1-2:

gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments/{comment_id}/replies \
  -f body=$'<Harness> - <Model>\n\nAddressed in <commit_sha>: <short summary>'

For threads that were intentionally deferred, leave the thread open. Add a reply only when that context helps the reviewer understand why it stays open.

Rule of thumb:

• addressed thread → reply first, then resolve
• deferred thread → usually leave open, optionally reply with context
• skipped thread → leave open

---

Step 7 — Resolve Threads on GitHub

Use the GraphQL resolveReviewThread mutation with the PRRT_* node ID from Step 2.

Only do this after Step 6 has been completed for that addressed thread:

• fix committed
• GitHub reply posted on the thread
• then resolve

gh api graphql -f query='
mutation {
  resolveReviewThread(input: { threadId: "<PRRT_node_id>" }) {
    thread {
      isResolved
    }
  }
}'

Repeat for each addressed thread. Verify the response contains "isResolved": true.

For threads that were skipped, do not resolve them — leave them open so reviewers know they were intentionally deferred.

---

Process Flow

Fetch REST comments (gh api pulls/{pr}/comments)
        │
        ▼
Fetch GraphQL thread IDs + isResolved status
        │
        ▼
For each unresolved thread:
  ├── Valid? ──► Apply code fix
  │                  │
  │                  ▼
  │             git add + git commit (commitlint msg)
  │                  │
  │                  ▼
  │             Reply to inline comment with harness/model attribution
  │             (required before resolving)
  │                  │
  │                  ▼
  │             Resolve thread via GraphQL mutation
  │
  ├── Skip? ──► Leave thread open, note reason
  │
  └── Ambiguous? ──► Ask human before proceeding
        │
        ▼
git push origin <branch>

---

Full Reference — All Commands in Order

# 1. Check branch
git branch --show-current

# 2. Fetch inline review comments (REST)
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments \
  --jq '.[] | {id: .id, author: .user.login, path: .path, line: .line, body: .body}'

# 3. Fetch thread node IDs + resolve status (GraphQL)
gh api graphql -f query='
{
  repository(owner: "{owner}", name: "{repo}") {
    pullRequest(number: {pr}) {
      reviewThreads(first: 50) {
        nodes {
          id
          isResolved
          comments(first: 1) {
            nodes {
              databaseId
              body
            }
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }
}'

# 4. Apply fix, then commit (one per comment)
git add <file> && git commit -m "<type>(<scope>): <description>"

# 5. Push
git push origin <branch-name>

# 6. Reply before resolving (repeat per addressed comment)
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments/{comment_id}/replies \
  -f body=$'<Harness> - <Model>\n\nAddressed in <commit_sha>: <short summary>'

# 7. Resolve thread (repeat per addressed comment)
gh api graphql -f query='
mutation {
  resolveReviewThread(input: { threadId: "<PRRT_node_id>" }) {
    thread { isResolved }
  }
}'

---

Key Rules

• One fix, one commit — never batch multiple comment fixes into a single commit
• Commitlint format always — type(scope): description, lowercase, no period at end
• Reply before resolve — every addressed thread gets a GitHub reply before resolution
• Identify the writer — the reply must include the harness + model string, such as Codex App - GPT-5.4 or Claude Code - Opus 4.6
• Resolve only what you fixed — do not resolve threads for skipped comments
• REST IDs ≠ GraphQL IDs — the id from gh api pulls/{pr}/comments cannot be used with resolveReviewThread; always fetch the PRRT_* node ID via GraphQL first
• Use REST for replies, GraphQL for resolve — reply with the review comment databaseId, resolve with the thread PRRT_* ID
• Verify resolution — check "isResolved": true in the mutation response before moving on