Iterate on PR Until CI Passes

Continuously iterate on the current branch until all CI checks pass and review feedback is addressed.

Requires: GitHub CLI (gh) authenticated.

Important: All scripts must be run from the repository root directory (where .git is located), not from the skill directory. Use the full path to the script via ${CLAUDE_SKILL_ROOT}.

Bundled Scripts

`scripts/fetch_pr_checks.py`

Fetches CI check status and extracts failure snippets from logs.

uv run ${CLAUDE_SKILL_ROOT}/scripts/fetch_pr_checks.py [--pr NUMBER]

Returns JSON:

{
  "pr": {"number": 123, "branch": "feat/foo"},
  "summary": {"total": 5, "passed": 3, "failed": 2, "pending": 0},
  "checks": [
    {"name": "tests", "status": "fail", "log_snippet": "...", "run_id": 123},
    {"name": "lint", "status": "pass"}
  ]
}

`scripts/fetch_pr_feedback.py`

Fetches and categorizes PR review feedback using the LOGAF scale.

uv run ${CLAUDE_SKILL_ROOT}/scripts/fetch_pr_feedback.py [--pr NUMBER]

Returns JSON with feedback categorized as:

high - Must address before merge (h:, blocker, changes requested)
medium - Should address (m:, standard feedback)
low - Optional (l:, nit, style, suggestion)
bot - Informational automated comments (Codecov, Dependabot, etc.)
resolved - Already resolved threads

Review bot feedback (from Sentry, Warden, Cursor, Bugbot, CodeQL, etc.) appears in high/medium/low with review_bot: true — it is NOT placed in the bot bucket.

Workflow

1. Identify PR

gh pr view --json number,url,headRefName

Stop if no PR exists for the current branch.

2. Check CI Status

Run ${CLAUDE_SKILL_ROOT}/scripts/fetch_pr_checks.py to get structured failure data.

Wait if pending: If review bot checks (sentry, warden, cursor, bugbot, seer, codeql) are still running, wait before proceeding—they post actionable feedback that must be evaluated. Informational bots (codecov) are not worth waiting for.

3. Fix CI Failures

For each failure in the script output:

Read the log_snippet to understand the failure
Read the relevant code before making changes
Fix the issue with minimal, targeted changes

Do NOT assume what failed based on check name alone—always read the logs.

4. Gather Review Feedback

Run ${CLAUDE_SKILL_ROOT}/scripts/fetch_pr_feedback.py to get categorized feedback.

5. Handle Feedback by LOGAF Priority

Auto-fix (no prompt):

high - must address (blockers, security, changes requested)
medium - should address (standard feedback)

This includes review bot feedback (items with review_bot: true). Treat it the same as human feedback:

Real issue found → fix it
False positive → skip, but explain why in a brief comment
Never silently ignore review bot feedback — always verify the finding

Prompt user for selection:

low - present numbered list and ask which to address:

Found 3 low-priority suggestions:
1. [l] "Consider renaming this variable" - @reviewer in api.py:42
2. [nit] "Could use a list comprehension" - @reviewer in utils.py:18
3. [style] "Add a docstring" - @reviewer in models.py:55

Which would you like to address? (e.g., "1,3" or "all" or "none")

Skip silently:

resolved threads
bot comments (informational only — Codecov, Dependabot, etc.)

6. Commit and Push

git add <files>
git commit -m "fix: <descriptive message>"
git push

7. Wait for CI

gh pr checks --watch --interval 30

8. Repeat

Return to step 2 if CI failed or new feedback appeared.

Exit Conditions

Success: All checks pass, no unaddressed high/medium feedback (including review bot findings), user has decided on low-priority items.

Ask for help: Same failure after 3 attempts, feedback needs clarification, infrastructure issues.

Stop: No PR exists, branch needs rebase.

Fallback

If scripts fail, use gh CLI directly:

gh pr checks --json name,state,bucket,link
gh run view <run-id> --log-failed
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/comments

iterate-pr