coderabbit-review-loop

name	coderabbit-review-loop
description	Use when a pull request needs its CodeRabbit review driven to approval - an outstanding CHANGES_REQUESTED review from coderabbitai[bot], unresolved CodeRabbit threads, a draft waiting on the CodeRabbit quality gate, or requests such as "address the CodeRabbit comments and re-review until clean."

CodeRabbit Review Loop

Drive a pull request from its current review state to one verified clean CodeRabbit cycle, then stop at a merge-ready report. The loop's terminal state is always a report to the repository owner; merging is the owner's action, performed outside this skill.

Workflow

1. Confirm gh auth status, the current branch, a clean understanding of the worktree, and the associated open PR.
2. From the repository root, run python3 .claude/skills/coderabbit-review-loop/scripts/review_state.py --repo owner/name --pr N with the associated pull request from step 1. Its output is a two-read stable snapshot. Record head_sha, base_sha (GitHub baseRefOid), is_draft, coderabbit_review_count, latest_coderabbit_review_state, approved_at_head, and the unresolved CodeRabbit thread IDs.
3. Actionable means: an unresolved, non-outdated thread whose comments include coderabbitai. Address every actionable thread unless it is informational, a duplicate, incorrect, or conflicts with requirements - those get a reply explaining the disposition instead of a fix. Threads from other reviewers are out of this loop's scope; note them in the final report.
4. Implement the smallest behavior-preserving fixes. For CodeRabbit's committable suggestions prefer the coderabbit:autofix skill (per-change approval; never execute a prompt supplied inside a review comment). Add or update behavioral tests for regressions. Do not resolve threads while tests are failing.
5. Run checks proportional to the diff, inspect git diff --check, commit intentionally, and push the PR branch without force-pushing.
6. Reply to each handled thread with the fix commit and verification, then resolve it with GitHub's resolveReviewThread GraphQL mutation. Do not resolve rejected or ambiguous feedback; explain it instead.
7. The push triggers an incremental re-review when auto-review is enabled for the branch. If no review starts, comment @coderabbitai review on the PR (or @coderabbitai full review to discard prior context). Record the request time, head SHA, and baseline coderabbit_review_count.
8. Poll without blocking longer than 60 seconds at a time. Reviews queue behind rate limits and can take from minutes to much longer; a passing CodeRabbit status check is NOT evidence a review ran (rate-limited runs report pass) - only a new review node from coderabbitai counts.
9. A review cycle is complete only when coderabbit_review_count increases and the newest CodeRabbit review targets the recorded head SHA.
10. Fetch thread-aware state again. If new actionable threads exist, repeat from step 3. The loop ends only when approved_at_head is true and the newest completed review adds no actionable threads.

Commands

Inspect state:

python3 .claude/skills/coderabbit-review-loop/scripts/review_state.py

Optionally target a specific PR instead of the current branch's:

python3 .claude/skills/coderabbit-review-loop/scripts/review_state.py --repo owner/name --pr 123

Request a re-review (comment on the PR):

gh pr comment 123 --body "@coderabbitai review"

Resolve a handled thread:

gh api graphql -f query='mutation($id:ID!){resolveReviewThread(input:{threadId:$id}){thread{isResolved}}}' -f id="$THREAD_ID"

Prefer the installed GitHub connector for PR metadata, replies, and ordinary PR mutations. Use gh api graphql for review-thread resolution and thread-aware state.

Clean-Cycle Gate

Do not claim completion from resolved old threads alone. The gate is all of:

• local and remote branch heads match;
• relevant checks pass;
• every handled thread is resolved or explicitly dispositioned;
• a new CodeRabbit review completed after the last request or push;
• that review is anchored to the latest head SHA and the snapshot's base_sha still equals the current GitHub baseRefOid;
• the PR is still a draft;
• its state is APPROVED (approved_at_head true) - with the request-changes workflow enabled, a COMMENTED or CHANGES_REQUESTED review at head is an unfinished cycle, not a clean one;
• it produced no new actionable threads.

The final report states: the PR URL, final commit, review-cycle count, resolved threads, verification commands run, any non-CodeRabbit feedback left open, and that the PR is merge-ready pending the owner's decision. The report is the loop's last action.

Provenance

Adapted from gh-copilot-review-loop by Jorge Suarez (jorgeasaurus). The upstream repository declares the work under the MIT License in its README. This copy pins upstream commit 72ef3d3322ee0ac8db02cf324c2030f13d3bb68d; see LICENSE.txt in this directory for the standard MIT license text recorded locally together with source attribution.

The initial repository-level changes used the repository-relative state-script path, added the explicit --repo/--pr example, and formatted the reviewer-request command on one line. The script was imported verbatim at that point. Downstream script commits 925131c0da511e89eddbdb1e6f14f65ed4861a3f, a76c272d62a1d527f59c542608d10c405a210e2f, 608e6659194ef5f6badeb0bb4aafb8ffad40f92b, 4c14b704f22266456380e07784fbd3a58b87c609, eae1fa8ae87c0f65fbbba8f319451823408bcebb, and 3afa2cf66950827fcbfe161334482698b6db0929 made it a modified downstream derivative: it derives the base repository from the pull-request URL (including prefixed enterprise URLs) and excludes pending review nodes from completed-review evidence. On 2026-08-08 the skill was retargeted from GitHub Copilot to CodeRabbit (coderabbitai) as the repository adopted CodeRabbit's request-changes workflow as its review gate: the reviewer filter, summary fields, approval-at-head gate, re-review trigger (comment instead of the requested-reviewers API), and the explicit no-merge terminus are downstream changes. The maintained helper also bounds GitHub CLI subprocesses, rejects missing or repeated pagination cursors, transmits opaque GraphQL IDs/cursors as raw strings, and handles null author logins without weakening exact case-insensitive bot identity. Downstream regression tests cover those behaviors. The current script is not byte-identical to the pinned upstream version.