posting-review-summary

Posting Review Summary

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "posting-review-summary" with this command: npx skills add bitwarden/ai-plugins/bitwarden-ai-plugins-posting-review-summary

Posting Review Summary

When to Use

Invoke this skill ONCE per review, AFTER all inline comments are posted. The summary MUST be scannable and brief because engineers read summaries first.

Context Detection

Context How to Detect Action

GitHub Actions mcp__github_comment__update_claude_comment available Update sticky comment

Local review Tool not available OR explicit local mode Write to review-summary.md

FORBIDDEN: Do not use gh pr comment to create summary comments.

PR Metadata Assessment

If PR title, description, or test plan is genuinely deficient, add as ❓ finding in the Code Review Details collapsible section.

Rules

  • DO NOT comment on minor improvements

  • DO NOT comment on adequate-but-imperfect metadata

  • NEVER add as an inline comment

  • DO NOT exceed 3 lines of feedback on the PR Metadata Assessment

Examples

Genuinely deficient means:

  • Title is literally "fix bug", "update", "changes", or single word

  • Description is empty or just "See Jira"

  • UI changes with zero screenshots

  • No test plan AND changes are testable

Adequate (DO NOT flag):

  • Title describes the change even if imperfect: "Fix login issue for SSO users"

  • Description exists and explains the change, even briefly

  • Test plan references Jira task with testing details

Format

  • QUESTION: PR title could be more specific
    • Suggested: "Fix null check in UserService.getProfile"

Summary Format

Overall Assessment: APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES

[1-2 neutral sentence describing what was reviewed]

<details> <summary>Code Review Details</summary>

[Findings grouped by severity - see ordering below]

[Optional PR Metadata Assessment - only for truly deficient metadata]

</details>

Findings in Details Section

Ordering: Group findings by severity in this exact order:

  • ❌ CRITICAL (first)

  • ⚠️ IMPORTANT

  • ♻️ DEBT

  • 🎨 SUGGESTED

  • ❓ QUESTION

Omit empty categories entirely.

Format per finding:

  • [emoji] [SEVERITY]: [One-line description]
    • filename.ts:42

Example:

<details> <summary>Code Review Details</summary>

  • CRITICAL: SQL injection in user query builder
    • src/auth/queries.ts:87
  • ⚠️ IMPORTANT: Missing null check on optional config
    • src/config/loader.ts:23

</details>

Output Execution

GitHub Actions:

Use mcp__github_comment__update_claude_comment to update the sticky comment with the summary.

Local:

Write summary to review-summary.md in working directory.

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

General

implementing-dapper-queries

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

avoiding-false-positives

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

retrospecting

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review