phx-pr-review

name	phx:pr-review
description	Address PR review comments on Elixir/Phoenix code — fetch comments, draft responses, optionally fix code. Use when the user shares a PR URL or mentions reviewer feedback.
effort	high
argument-hint	<PR number or URL> [--fix]

PR Review Response

Fetch PR review comments, categorize them, draft responses, and optionally apply code fixes.

Usage

/phx:pr-review 42              # Address comments on PR #42
/phx:pr-review 42 --fix        # Address + apply code fixes
/phx:pr-review https://...     # Full URL also works

Arguments

$ARGUMENTS = PR number (or URL), optionally followed by --fix.

Workflow

Step 1: Fetch PR Context

Run gh pr view {number} --json title,body,state,baseRefName,headRefName for PR metadata. Run gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/comments --paginate and gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/reviews --paginate for all review comments. Run gh pr diff {number} for the diff context.

Parse the PR number from $ARGUMENTS. If a URL, extract the number from it. Detect --fix flag.

Step 2: Categorize Comments

Group each comment into one of these categories:

Category	Signal	Action
Code change	"should be", "change to", "use X instead"	Draft fix + response
Question	"why", "what if", "how does"	Draft explanation
Nitpick	"nit:", style-only, formatting	Quick acknowledgment
Praise	"nice", "good", "LGTM"	No action needed
Discussion	Architecture, trade-offs, alternatives	Draft thoughtful response

Step 3: Map to Code Locations

For each code-change comment:

1. Find the file and line from the comment's path and position
2. Read the current code at that location
3. Understand the reviewer's suggestion in context
4. Check if the suggestion conflicts with Iron Laws

Step 4: Draft Responses

For each comment, draft a response following patterns in ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/response-patterns.md.

Present ALL draft responses to the user for review:

## PR #{number}: {title}
### {n} comments to address

**Code changes ({n}):**
1. {file}:{line} — {reviewer suggestion} → {proposed fix}

**Questions ({n}):**
1. {question summary} → {draft answer}

**Nitpicks ({n}):**
1. {nit} → Acknowledged

**Discussion ({n}):**
1. {topic} → {draft response}

Step 5: Apply Fixes (if --fix)

If --fix flag provided AND user approves:

1. Apply code changes from approved code-change responses
2. Run mix compile --warnings-as-errors && mix test
3. If tests pass, present the changes
4. Do NOT commit or push — leave that to the user

Step 6: Post Responses (with user approval)

STOP and ask user to review all draft responses.

After user approves (may edit some):

Post each approved response as a reply using gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/comments/{id}/replies -f body="{response}".

Iron Laws

1. NEVER auto-post responses — Always show drafts and get explicit approval
2. NEVER dismiss a review — Only the reviewer should dismiss
3. Iron Laws override reviewer suggestions — If a reviewer suggests code that violates an Iron Law, explain why in the response
4. Keep responses constructive — Acknowledge the feedback, explain reasoning
5. Separate fixes from responses — Apply code changes in a separate step

Integration

PR receives review comments
       ↓
/phx:pr-review {number}  ← YOU ARE HERE
       ↓
   Fix code? → --fix flag applies changes
       ↓
   Post responses (after user approval)
       ↓
   Push changes → user handles git push

Next Steps

After addressing review comments, suggest follow-up:

- `/phx:plan` — Create a plan if findings reveal scope gaps
- `/phx:verify` — Run full verification before pushing
- Push changes — user handles git push

References

• ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/response-patterns.md — Response templates and common patterns