ai-14all-fix-review

name	ai-14all-fix-review
description	Use when the user says "fix review", "fix pending review", or asks to act on review comments authored in the ai-14all desktop app — fetching pending comments for the current worktree over MCP, applying each fix, and marking them addressed.
version	0.1.0

ai-14all-fix-review

Intent

Act on code-review comments the user authored in the ai-14all desktop app: fetch every pending comment for the current worktree, apply the requested fix, and mark each one addressed. The app's MCP server (ai-14all) is the only sanctioned interface to review state; it exposes two tools:

• list_pending_reviews({ worktreePath: string }) — returns { reviews: ReviewComment[] } for the worktree at the given path. Each review has id, filePath, startLine, endLine, snippet, body, source ("working-tree" | "commit"), commitSha, createdAt.
• mark_review_addressed({ commentId: string }) — call after applying the fix for a comment. Returns { ok: true } or { ok: false, error: "not_found" | "already_addressed" }.

Inputs

• The worktree path of the current session (the working directory you are running inside) — passed as worktreePath.
• Optional: a user-named subset of files or comments to address first.

Preconditions

• The ai-14all desktop app is running: <userData>/ai-14all/ai-14all/mcp-port exists. (<userData> is the OS-conventional Electron userData dir: ~/Library/Application Support/ai-14all/ on macOS, %APPDATA%\\ai-14all\\ on Windows, ~/.config/ai-14all/ on Linux.) If the file is missing, tell the user "ai-14all is not running; please launch the app and try again," and stop.
• The ai-14all MCP server is registered in the current session.
• The worktree's files are editable with your normal edit tools.

Procedure

1. Determine the worktree path you are running inside.
2. Call list_pending_reviews({ worktreePath }).
3. For each returned review:
   • Locate the review's snippet in the current contents of filePath.
     • If it appears verbatim, use those lines (the startLine/endLine are hints from comment time and may be stale).
     • If it does not appear verbatim, do not guess. Tell the user: "Could not locate snippet for comment on . The file may have changed since the comment was written." Skip this comment.
   • Apply the fix described in body using your normal edit tools.
   • Call mark_review_addressed({ commentId }). If the response is { ok: false, error: "already_addressed" }, treat as success (someone else marked it; idempotent).
4. After processing every review, summarise to the user: how many were addressed, how many were skipped, and why.

What source and commitSha mean

• source: "working-tree" — the comment was written against the user's current uncommitted changes. Apply edits to the working tree.
• source: "commit" with commitSha set — the comment was written while the user was reviewing an older commit. The file may have moved or been rewritten since. Use snippet-search to locate; if not found, surface the commitSha to the user so they can decide whether to amend, fix-forward, or dismiss.

Output

• Fixes applied to the working tree, one per addressed comment, and each addressed comment marked via mark_review_addressed.
• A final summary: how many comments were addressed, how many were skipped, and why each skip happened.
• When list_pending_reviews returns { reviews: [] }: the exact message "No pending review comments for this worktree." and nothing else.

Examples

Input: the user says "fix the pending reviews". list_pending_reviews returns one comment: { id: "rc-42", filePath: "src/auth.ts", snippet: "if (token === stored)", body: "use a constant-time comparison here", source: "working-tree" }.

The agent finds the snippet verbatim in src/auth.ts, replaces the comparison with a constant-time equality check, then calls mark_review_addressed({ commentId: "rc-42" }) and receives { ok: true }.

Output: "1 review addressed (rc-42: constant-time comparison in src/auth.ts), 0 skipped."

Anti-patterns

• Inventing reviews when the list is empty — report the empty state verbatim.
• Guessing at a stale snippet's location instead of skipping and reporting it.
• Skipping mark_review_addressed after a successful fix — never assume the app detects fixes from the diff.
• Touching ai-14all's review state through any channel other than the two MCP tools above.
• Trusting startLine/endLine over the snippet text — the line numbers are hints, the snippet is the anchor.