land
Originally fromopenai/symphony
SKILL.md
Land
Goals
- Ensure the PR is conflict-free with main.
- Keep CI green and fix failures when they occur.
- Squash-merge the PR once checks pass.
- Do not yield to the user until the PR is merged; keep the watcher loop running unless blocked.
- No need to delete remote branches after merge; the repo auto-deletes head branches.
Preconditions
ghCLI is authenticated.- You are on the PR branch with a clean working tree.
Steps
- Locate the PR for the current branch.
- Confirm the full gauntlet is green locally before any push.
- If the working tree has uncommitted changes, commit with the
commitskill and push with thepushskill before proceeding. - Check mergeability and conflicts against main.
- If conflicts exist, use the
pullskill to fetch/mergeorigin/mainand resolve conflicts, then use thepushskill to publish the updated branch. - Ensure Codex review comments (if present) are acknowledged and any required fixes are handled before merging.
- Watch checks until complete.
- If checks fail, pull logs, fix the issue, commit with the
commitskill, push with thepushskill, and re-run checks. - When all checks are green and review feedback is addressed, squash-merge and delete the branch using the PR title/body for the merge subject/body.
- Context guard: Before implementing review feedback, confirm it does not conflict with the user’s stated intent or task context. If it conflicts, respond inline with a justification and ask the user before changing code.
- Pushback template: When disagreeing, reply inline with: acknowledge + rationale + offer alternative.
- Ambiguity gate: When ambiguity blocks progress, use the clarification
flow (assign PR to current GH user, mention them, wait for response). Do not
implement until ambiguity is resolved.
- If you are confident you know better than the reviewer, you may proceed without asking the user, but reply inline with your rationale.
- Per-comment mode: For each review comment, choose one of: accept, clarify, or push back. Reply inline (or in the issue thread for Codex reviews) stating the mode before changing code.
- Reply before change: Always respond with intended action before pushing code changes (inline for review comments, issue thread for Codex reviews).
Commands
# Ensure branch and PR context
branch=$(git branch --show-current)
pr_number=$(gh pr view --json number -q .number)
pr_title=$(gh pr view --json title -q .title)
pr_body=$(gh pr view --json body -q .body)
# Check mergeability and conflicts
mergeable=$(gh pr view --json mergeable -q .mergeable)
if [ "$mergeable" = "CONFLICTING" ]; then
# Run the `pull` skill to handle fetch + merge + conflict resolution.
# Then run the `push` skill to publish the updated branch.
fi
# Preferred: use the Async Watch Helper below. The manual loop is a fallback
# when Python cannot run or the helper script is unavailable.
# Wait for review feedback: Codex reviews arrive as issue comments that start
# with "## Codex Review — <persona>". Treat them like reviewer feedback: reply
# with a `[codex]` issue comment acknowledging the findings and whether you're
# addressing or deferring them.
while true; do
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/"$pr_number"/comments \
--jq '.[] | select(.body | startswith("## Codex Review")) | .id' | rg -q '.' \
&& break
sleep 10
done
# Watch checks
if ! gh pr checks --watch; then
gh pr checks
# Identify failing run and inspect logs
# gh run list --branch "$branch"
# gh run view <run-id> --log
exit 1
fi
# Squash-merge (remote branches auto-delete on merge in this repo)
gh pr merge --squash --subject "$pr_title" --body "$pr_body"
Async Watch Helper
Preferred: use the asyncio watcher to monitor review comments, CI, and head updates in parallel:
python3 .agents/skills/land/land_watch.py
Exit codes:
- 2: Review comments detected (address feedback)
- 3: CI checks failed
- 4: PR head updated (autofix commit detected)
Failure Handling
- If checks fail, pull details with
gh pr checksandgh run view --log, then fix locally, commit with thecommitskill, push with thepushskill, and re-run the watch. - Use judgment to identify flaky failures. If a failure is a flake (e.g., a timeout on only one platform), you may proceed without fixing it.
- If CI pushes an auto-fix commit (authored by GitHub Actions), it does not
trigger a fresh CI run. Detect the updated PR head, pull locally, merge
origin/mainif needed, add a real author commit, and force-push to retrigger CI, then restart the checks loop. - If all jobs fail with corrupted pnpm lockfile errors on the merge commit, the
remediation is to fetch latest
origin/main, merge, force-push, and rerun CI. - If mergeability is
UNKNOWN, wait and re-check. - Do not merge while review comments (human or Codex review) are outstanding.
- Codex review jobs retry on failure and are non-blocking; use the presence of
## Codex Review — <persona>issue comments (not job status) as the signal that review feedback is available. - Do not enable auto-merge; this repo has no required checks so auto-merge can skip tests.
- If the remote PR branch advanced due to your own prior force-push or merge,
avoid redundant merges; re-run the formatter locally if needed and
git push --force-with-lease.
Review Handling
- Codex reviews now arrive as issue comments posted by GitHub Actions. They
start with
## Codex Review — <persona>and include the reviewer’s methodology + guardrails used. Treat these as feedback that must be acknowledged before merge. - Human review comments are blocking and must be addressed (responded to and resolved) before requesting a new review or merging.
- If multiple reviewers comment in the same thread, respond to each comment (batching is fine) before closing the thread.
- Fetch review comments via
gh apiand reply with a prefixed comment. - Use review comment endpoints (not issue comments) to find inline feedback:
- List PR review comments:
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<pr_number>/comments - PR issue comments (top-level discussion):
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<pr_number>/comments - Reply to a specific review comment:
gh api -X POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<pr_number>/comments \ -f body='[codex] <response>' -F in_reply_to=<comment_id>
- List PR review comments:
in_reply_tomust be the numeric review comment id (e.g.,2710521800), not the GraphQL node id (e.g.,PRRC_...), and the endpoint must include the PR number (/pulls/<pr_number>/comments).- If GraphQL review reply mutation is forbidden, use REST.
- A 404 on reply typically means the wrong endpoint (missing PR number) or insufficient scope; verify by listing comments first.
- All GitHub comments generated by this agent must be prefixed with
[codex]. - For Codex review issue comments, reply in the issue thread (not a review
thread) with
[codex]and state whether you will address the feedback now or defer it (include rationale). - If feedback requires changes:
- For inline review comments (human), reply with intended fixes
(
[codex] ...) as an inline reply to the original review comment using the review comment endpoint andin_reply_to(do not use issue comments for this). - Implement fixes, commit, push.
- Reply with the fix details and commit sha (
[codex] ...) in the same place you acknowledged the feedback (issue comment for Codex reviews, inline reply for review comments). - The land watcher treats Codex review issue comments as unresolved until a
newer
[codex]issue comment is posted acknowledging the findings.
- For inline review comments (human), reply with intended fixes
(
- Only request a new Codex review when you need a rerun (e.g., after new
commits). Do not request one without changes since the last review.
- Before requesting a new Codex review, re-run the land watcher and ensure
there are zero outstanding review comments (all have
[codex]inline replies). - After pushing new commits, the Codex review workflow will rerun on PR
synchronization (or you can re-run the workflow manually). Post a concise
root-level summary comment so reviewers have the latest delta:
[codex] Changes since last review: - <short bullets of deltas> Commits: <sha>, <sha> Tests: <commands run> - Only request a new review if there is at least one new commit since the previous request.
- Wait for the next Codex review comment before merging.
- Before requesting a new Codex review, re-run the land watcher and ensure
there are zero outstanding review comments (all have
Scope + PR Metadata
- The PR title and description should reflect the full scope of the change, not just the most recent fix.
- If review feedback expands scope, decide whether to include it now or defer
it. You can accept, defer, or decline feedback. If deferring or declining,
call it out in the root-level
[codex]update with a brief reason (e.g., out-of-scope, conflicts with intent, unnecessary). - Correctness issues raised in review comments should be addressed. If you plan to defer or decline a correctness concern, validate first and explain why the concern does not apply.
- Classify each review comment as one of: correctness, design, style, clarification, scope.
- For correctness feedback, provide concrete validation (test, log, or reasoning) before closing it.
- When accepting feedback, include a one-line rationale in the root-level update.
- When declining feedback, offer a brief alternative or follow-up trigger.
- Prefer a single consolidated "review addressed" root-level comment after a batch of fixes instead of many small updates.
- For doc feedback, confirm the doc change matches behavior (no doc-only edits to appease review).
Weekly Installs
72
Repository
odysseus0/symphonyGitHub Stars
39
First Seen
4 days ago
Security Audits
Installed on
codex71
claude-code7
opencode6
gemini-cli6
github-copilot6
amp6