summarize-review

name	summarize-review
description	Write a maintainer-style summary review of a GitHub PR (shortcomings, modifications, potential fixes) for the original author, run after review fixes are applied.
argument-hint	[pr-number-or-url]

Context

Repository: !gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q .nameWithOwner 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown" Default branch: !git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's@refs/remotes/origin/@@' || echo main Current branch: !git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null

Instructions

Output the body for the user to confirm; do not post unless explicitly asked.

Process

1. Establish baseline and head ($ARGUMENTS is a PR number, a full PR URL, or empty; if empty, infer the PR from the current branch via gh pr view --json number,title,headRefName):

   • Baseline <first-sha> (last commit in the PR author's leading run): gh api repos/<o>/<r>/pulls/<n>/commits --paginate --jq '(.[0].author.login // .[0].commit.author.name) as $a | reduce .[] as $c ({run: true, sha: null}; if .run and (($c.author.login // $c.commit.author.name) == $a) then {run: true, sha: $c.sha} else {run: false, sha: .sha} end) | .sha'. .author.login is null for unlinked-email commits, so fall back to .commit.author.name when reducing.
   • Latest head SHA: gh api repos/<o>/<r>/pulls/<n> --jq .head.sha
   • First commit's author is the review's audience: gh api repos/<o>/<r>/pulls/<n>/commits --paginate --jq '.[0].author.login'

2. Read the original author's code at the first PR commit: git show <first-sha>:<path> for each changed file.

3. Diff baseline against head with git diff <first-sha> <head-sha>; this authoritative diff is the "what we modified" section. Read full files at HEAD via the Read tool only where you need surrounding context the diff alone does not show.

4. Identify shortcomings in the original implementation:

   • Bugs (data corruption, edge cases, off-by-one, race conditions).
   • Missing functionality (incomplete API surface, expected bindings absent).
   • Anti-patterns (redundant indirection, dead code, misleading names).
   • Performance or correctness gaps (Unicode, concurrency).
   • Style nits worth raising (multi-line block comments, inconsistent naming).
   • Cite file:line in the original commit when concrete.
   • Frame each as direct critique of the code, not as "the bot said X". Do not name the bots.

5. Identify modifications between original and current:

   • For each shortcoming above, what concrete change resolved it.
   • Pure additions (new tests, docs, helpers) also count.
   • Use present tense ("renames X to Y", "replaces array with Map", "adds Z binding").

6. Identify potential further fixes: real issues that remain or are deferred; each bullet states why (out of scope for this PR, upstream library limitation, low ROI, ergonomic taste). Be honest about partial fixes: if a modification is incomplete, list the remaining work here. Do not invent suggestions to pad.

7. Assemble the review body in this layout:

   ## review
   
   <one-line verdict, e.g. "LGTM as `patch`." or "looks good with the items below.">
   
   ### shortcomings of the original implementation
   - <bullet>
   - <bullet>
   
   ### what we modified
   - <bullet>
   - <bullet>
   
   ### potential further fixes
   - <bullet>
   - <bullet>
   

8. Posting commands. This skill drafts the body; for the full maintainer approve flow (the should-approve gate, the self-approval guard, and anti-stacking) use /approve-pr. When asked to post this body directly, pass it via --body-file - with a quoted heredoc so backticks and code survive (-b/--body "..." mangles them), with one of:

   • gh pr review <num> --approve --body-file - <<'EOF' ... EOF for approval
   • --comment for a non-approving comment, --request-changes for changes requested (same --body-file - form)
   • To replace your existing review's body, resolve its id with gh api repos/<o>/<r>/pulls/<n>/reviews --jq '[.[] | select(.user.login=="<me>")] | last | .id', then gh api --method PUT repos/<o>/<r>/pulls/<n>/reviews/<review-id> -f body="<text>"; PUT edits the body text only, never the review state.