PR Fix Skill

Operator Context

Hardcoded Behaviors (Always Apply)

• CLAUDE.md Compliance: Read and follow repository CLAUDE.md before making any changes
• Validate Every Comment: NEVER blindly fix a comment without verifying its claim against actual code
• Show Plan First: NEVER apply fixes without presenting the fix plan and getting confirmation
• Single Commit: All fixes go into one commit with descriptive message referencing the PR
• No Scope Creep: Fix only what reviewers asked for. No "while I'm here" improvements
• Branch Safety: Never commit directly to main/master; work on the PR's branch

Default Behaviors (ON unless disabled)

• Comment Classification: Categorize each comment as VALID, INVALID, or NEEDS-DISCUSSION
• Before/After Display: Show code diff for each fix before committing
• Skip Invalid Comments: Report invalid comments with explanation instead of fixing
• Push After Commit: Push changes to update the PR after committing
• Final Report: Display summary of fixed, skipped, and pending items

Optional Behaviors (OFF unless enabled)

• Reply to Comments: Post resolution replies on fixed comment threads via

  gh api

• Resolve Threads: Mark fixed comment threads as resolved
• NEEDS-DISCUSSION Auto-Reply: Draft reply templates for ambiguous comments

What This Skill CAN Do

• Fetch and validate PR review comments against actual code
• Distinguish valid feedback from incorrect claims
• Apply targeted fixes for validated comments only
• Commit and push all fixes in a single clean commit
• Report what was fixed, skipped, or needs discussion

What This Skill CANNOT Do

• Fix comments without first validating them against the codebase
• Apply fixes without showing the plan and getting confirmation
• Create PRs (use pr-pipeline instead)
• Review code for new issues (use /pr-review instead)
• Make unrelated improvements beyond what reviewers requested

Instructions

Phase 1: IDENTIFY PR

gh pr view --json number,title,headRefName --jq '{number, title, headRefName}'

Phase 2: FETCH & VALIDATE

# Get review comments (inline comments on code)
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/comments \
  --jq '.[] | {id, path, line: .original_line, body, user: .user.login}'

# Get review-level comments
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/reviews \
  --jq '.[] | select(.body != "") | {id, body, state, user: .user.login}'

1. Read the actual file and line referenced
2. Test the reviewer's claim (does the issue actually exist?)
3. Classify:
   • VALID: Claim verified, fix needed
   • INVALID: Claim does not match actual code state
   • NEEDS-DISCUSSION: Subjective or design-level feedback

Phase 3: SHOW FIX PLAN

PR #{number}: "{title}"

Comments to address: {N} VALID, {N} INVALID, {N} NEEDS-DISCUSSION

Will fix:
  1. [VALID] src/auth.go:42 - "Add nil check for user"
  2. [VALID] src/utils.go:15 - "Remove unused import"

Will skip:
  3. [INVALID] src/api.go:99 - "URL is outdated" (verified: URL returns 200)

Needs discussion:
  4. [DISCUSS] src/db.go:55 - "Consider using transaction"

Proceed with fixes?

Phase 4: APPLY FIXES

1. Read the file at the referenced location
2. Apply the minimal fix that addresses the comment
3. Show the before/after diff
4. Verify the fix compiles or passes basic checks

Phase 5: COMMIT & PUSH

# Stage changed files (list specific files, not -A)
git add {file1} {file2} ...

# Commit with descriptive message
git commit -m "Address PR review comments

- {fix description 1}
- {fix description 2}
- {fix description 3}

Resolves review comments on PR #{number}"

# Push to update PR
git push

Phase 6: FINAL REPORT

PR FIX COMPLETE

Fixed: {N} issues
Skipped: {N} (invalid)
Pending: {N} (needs discussion)

Commit: {hash} "Address PR review comments"
Pushed to: origin/{branch}

PR: https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}/pull/{number}

Remaining:
  - Discuss {topic} in {file}:{line} with reviewer

Examples

Example 1: Mixed Valid and Invalid Comments

1. Fetch 5 review comments on PR #42 (IDENTIFY, FETCH)
2. Validate: 3 VALID, 1 INVALID (import IS used on line 45), 1 NEEDS-DISCUSSION (VALIDATE)
3. Show plan, user confirms 3 fixes (PLAN)
4. Apply fixes, show before/after for each (FIX)
5. Single commit, push (COMMIT) Result: 3 fixes committed, 1 invalid explained, 1 pending discussion

Example 2: All Comments Invalid

1. Detect PR for current branch, fetch 3 comments (IDENTIFY, FETCH)
2. Validate all 3: each claim does not match current code state (VALIDATE)
3. Report: no changes needed, explain why each is invalid (REPORT) Result: No changes made, user informed with evidence

Error Handling

Error: "No PR Found for Current Branch"

gh

1. Verify

   gh auth status

   succeeds
2. Check if a PR exists:

   gh pr list --head {branch}

3. If no PR, suggest creating one first

Error: "Comment References Deleted or Moved Code"

1. Search for the referenced code pattern in the current file
2. If found at a different location, apply fix there
3. If code was removed entirely, mark comment as stale and skip

Error: "Fix Causes Test Failures"

1. Run tests to identify which fail
2. Evaluate whether tests need updating or fix needs adjustment
3. If reviewer's suggestion is wrong, classify as NEEDS-DISCUSSION
4. Document the test failure evidence

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern 1: Blindly Applying All Comments

Anti-Pattern 2: Fixing Beyond What Was Asked

Anti-Pattern 3: Separate Commits Per Comment

Anti-Pattern 4: Skipping the Plan Step

References

• Anti-Rationalization - Prevents shortcut rationalizations
• Verification Checklist - Pre-completion checks

Domain-Specific Anti-Rationalization