| name | respond-to-pr-comments |
| description | Work through the review comments on a pull request — fix the valid ones, reply to the rest explaining why not. Use when the user says to address, respond to, resolve, or handle PR / review comments, or pastes a PR link and asks to deal with the feedback. |
| argument-hint | <PR url or number> |
Address every review comment on a pull request. Judge each one on its merits, fix what's valid, and answer what isn't.
You need the PR — a URL or number — in the arguments. If none was given, ask for it before doing anything else.
Steps
1. Gather the comments
- Resolve the PR from the argument. Use
gh pr view <pr> --json ..., gh api, and gh pr diff to fetch both top-level review comments and inline code comments, each with its file, line, author, and thread.
- List every unresolved comment. Resolved and outdated threads are already done — skip them.
2. Judge each comment on its merits
For each comment decide valid or invalid:
- Valid — a real bug, a correctness or clarity issue, or a worthwhile improvement.
- Invalid — wrong, out of scope, based on a misread, or a matter of taste you've weighed and disagree with.
Judge on the merits, not on who wrote it. Don't reflexively agree to be agreeable, and don't dig in out of pride.
3. Fix the valid ones
- Make the change in the working tree. Group related fixes into coherent commits.
- Reply on that comment's thread noting what you changed and the commit that did it, so the reviewer can see it was handled.
4. Answer the invalid ones
- Leave the code as is. Reply on the thread explaining — specifically, without hedging — why you're not making the change: the misread, the constraint, the tradeoff.
- Disagree with the comment, never the commenter. Concrete and respectful.
5. Report and hand back the link
- Post one summary comment on the PR: what you fixed (with commit links) and what you declined (with a one-line reason each).
- Give the user the PR link so they can review your responses.
Completion criterion: every unresolved comment is either fixed-and-replied or answered-with-a-reason — none left untouched — and the user has the PR link.
