pr-review-fixer
PR Review Fixer
Fetch unresolved PR comments, validate each issue, create a fix plan, implement fixes, and verify CI checks pass (tests, lint, build).
Workflow
1. Fetch PR Comments
# Get PR info
PR_NUM=$(gh pr view --json number --jq '.number')
# Get all PR comments via GraphQL (code-level AND PR-level)
gh api graphql -f query='
query($owner: String!, $repo: String!, $pr: Int!) {
repository(owner: $owner, name: $repo) {
pullRequest(number: $pr) {
# Code-level review comments (file/line specific)
reviewThreads(first: 100) {
nodes {
id
isResolved
comments(first: 50) {
nodes { id body author { login } path line }
}
}
}
# PR-level review comments (top-level review body)
reviews(first: 50) {
nodes {
id
body
state
author { login }
}
}
# PR-level issue comments (general discussion)
comments(first: 100) {
nodes {
id
body
author { login }
}
}
}
}
}
' -f owner=OWNER -f repo=REPO -F pr=$PR_NUM
2. Filter Comments
Code-level comments (reviewThreads):
- Exclude resolved threads: Filter out threads where
isResolved: true - claude[bot] handling: For
claude[bot]comments, keep only the last comment per thread - Group by file/location: Organize by path and line number
PR-level review comments (reviews):
- Exclude empty bodies: Skip reviews with empty or whitespace-only body
- Exclude approval-only: Skip reviews with state
APPROVEDand no actionable feedback - claude[bot] handling: For
claude[bot]reviews, keep only the most recent one
PR-level issue comments (comments):
- Exclude bot noise: Skip automated comments (CI bots, etc.) unless actionable
- claude[bot] handling: Keep only the last
claude[bot]comment - Identify actionable items: Look for requested changes, questions, or suggestions
3. Determine Working Location
Review reports are posted as PR comments (not committed). Task files are local working files only.
Working directory: Use a temp directory or .claude/reviews/PR-[number]/ for local task files during the session. These files are not committed.
Iteration tracking: Check existing PR comments by claude[bot] with "PR Review Overview" in the body. Count those to determine the current iteration number N.
4. Validate Issues
Code-level comments:
- Read the referenced code at path:line
- Evaluate: Is issue still present? Is suggestion correct? Does it align with project conventions?
- Mark as valid or invalid with brief rationale
PR-level comments:
- Parse the comment for actionable items (suggestions, questions, requested changes)
- Check if the feedback applies to current PR state (changes may have been made since)
- Evaluate: Is the request reasonable? Does it align with project goals?
- Mark as valid or invalid with brief rationale
- Skip pure acknowledgments, thanks, or informational comments without action items
5. Create Review Overview
Prepare the review overview content (this will be posted as a PR comment, not committed):
# PR Review Overview - Iteration [N]
**PR**: #[number] | **Branch**: [name] | **Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
## Valid Issues
### Code-Level Issues
#### Issue 1: [title]
- **File**: `path:line`
- **Reviewer**: @user
- **Comment**: [quoted]
- **Validation**: [rationale]
### PR-Level Issues
#### Issue 2: [title]
- **Type**: review comment | discussion comment
- **Reviewer**: @user
- **Comment**: [quoted]
- **Validation**: [rationale]
## Invalid/Skipped Issues
### Issue A: [title]
- **Location**: `path:line` or PR-level
- **Reviewer**: @user
- **Comment**: [quoted]
- **Reason**: [why invalid]
6. Create Task List
Use rune to create review-fixes-[N].md:
rune create ${OUTPUT_DIR}/review-fixes-${N}.md \
--title "PR Review Fixes - Iteration ${N}" \
--reference ${OUTPUT_DIR}/review-overview-${N}.md
# Add tasks via batch for efficiency
rune batch ${OUTPUT_DIR}/review-fixes-${N}.md --input '{
"file": "review-fixes-'${N}'.md",
"operations": [
{"type": "add", "title": "Fix: [issue 1]"},
{"type": "add", "title": "Fix: [issue 2]"}
]
}'
7. Fix Issues
Loop through tasks:
rune next [file]- get next taskrune progress [file] [id]- mark in-progress- Implement the fix
rune complete [file] [id]- mark complete- Repeat until done
8. Check CI Status
After fixing review comments, verify CI checks:
# Get check status for the PR
gh pr checks --json name,state,conclusion
# For failed checks, get details
gh run view [RUN_ID] --log-failed
Check types to handle:
- Test failures: Parse test output, identify failing tests, fix code or tests
- Lint errors: Run linter locally, fix reported issues
- Type errors: Run type checker, fix type mismatches
- Build failures: Check build logs, fix compilation issues
9. Fix CI Issues
For each failed check:
- Identify the failure type from check name and logs
- Run locally to reproduce:
- Tests:
make testor project's test command - Lint:
make lintor project's lint command - Types:
make typecheckor equivalent
- Tests:
- Parse error output to identify specific failures
- Fix the issues:
- For test failures: Check if test expectations need updating or if code has a bug
- For lint errors: Apply automatic fixes where possible, manual fixes otherwise
- For type errors: Add/fix type annotations or fix type mismatches
- Re-run locally to verify fix
- Add to task list if not already tracked
Test failure handling:
# Run tests and capture output
make test 2>&1 | tee test-output.txt
# If using pytest
pytest --tb=short 2>&1 | tee test-output.txt
# If using go test
go test ./... 2>&1 | tee test-output.txt
Parse output for:
- Failed test names and locations
- Assertion errors with expected vs actual values
- Stack traces pointing to failure source
10. Resolve Fixed Threads
After fixing code-level issues, resolve the corresponding review threads on GitHub:
# For each fixed code-level thread, resolve it using its thread ID
gh api graphql -f query='
mutation($threadId: ID!) {
resolveReviewThread(input: {threadId: $threadId}) {
thread { isResolved }
}
}
' -f threadId=THREAD_NODE_ID
Only resolve threads whose issues were validated and fixed. Do not resolve threads that were skipped or marked invalid — those need human attention.
11. Post Review Report as PR Comment
Post the review overview as a comment on the PR. This replaces committing report files.
# Post the review overview content as a PR comment
gh pr comment $PR_NUM --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
# PR Review Overview - Iteration [N]
**PR**: #[number] | **Branch**: [name] | **Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
## Valid Issues (fixed)
[List of validated and fixed issues with file:line, reviewer, and brief description]
## Invalid/Skipped Issues
[List of skipped issues with rationale]
## CI Status
[Summary of CI check results and any fixes applied]
EOF
)"
Do not commit review-overview-*.md or review-fixes-*.md files. They are working files only.
12. Commit, Push, and Verify
After all fixes:
- Run full test suite locally
- Run linter
- Commit only code changes (exclude any local review/task files)
- Push to remote
- Monitor CI status to confirm checks pass
Key Behaviors
- Auto-fix: Fix all validated issues without pausing for approval
- Context preservation: Keep diff_hunk context when analyzing
- Convention adherence: Follow project's existing patterns
- Deduplication: Consolidate multiple comments on same issue into one task
- CI verification: Always check CI status after fixing review comments
- Local reproduction: Run tests/linters locally before pushing fixes
- Reports as comments: Post review reports as PR comments, never commit them
- Clean commits: Only commit actual code changes, not working/report files
More from arjenschwarz/agentic-coding
ui-ux-reviewer
Evaluate and improve user experience of interfaces (CLI, web, mobile)
120efficiency-optimizer
Analyze code for performance and efficiency improvements
41design-critic
Critical review of design documents, architecture proposals, and requirements
26fix-bug
Systematic bug investigation, resolution, and documentation. Use when fixing bugs that need thorough analysis, test coverage, and a formal bugfix report. Applies systematic debugging methodology, creates regression tests, and generates a standardized report in specs/bugfixes/<bug-name>/. For complex bugs, spawns competing implementation agents (including alternative harnesses like Kiro) and selects the best solution. Triggers on requests like "fix this bug", "debug and document this issue", or when a bug needs both resolution and documentation.
22permission-analyzer
Generate Claude Code permissions config from session history. Use when setting up autonomous mode, configuring .claude/settings.json, avoiding --dangerously-skip-permissions, or analyzing what permissions a project needs. Reads session logs to extract Bash commands and MCP tools actually used, then generates appropriate allow/deny rules.
22performing-systematic-debugging-for-stubborn-problems
Applies a modified Fagan Inspection methodology to systematically resolve persistent bugs and complex issues. Use when multiple previous fix attempts have failed repeatedly, when dealing with intricate system interactions, or when a methodical root cause analysis is needed. Do not use for simple troubleshooting. Triggers after multiple failed debugging attempts on the same complex issue.
20