Address PR Review Comments

Fetch code review comments on a PR (from Copilot, bots, or humans), critically evaluate each one, fix the valid issues, and reply to each comment.

Usage

/address-review <PR_URL_or_NUMBER>

Examples:

/address-review https://github.com/your-org/your-repo/pull/123 /address-review 123

What It Does

1. Fetch Review Comments

Checks BOTH types of comments:

• Line-specific review comments: gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr_number}/comments --paginate

• General PR-level comments: gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{pr_number}/comments --paginate

Uses jq queries to find unreplied comments:

Unreplied line-specific comments

gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments --paginate |
jq -r '[.[] | select(.in_reply_to_id == null)] as $originals | [.[] | .in_reply_to_id] as $replied_ids | $originals | map(select(.id as $id | $replied_ids | index($id) | not))'

General PR comments (review-style)

gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{pr}/comments --paginate |
jq -r '.[] | select(.body | test("^###? Review:"; "i"))'

2. Analyze Each Comment

For each unreplied comment:

• Reads the relevant file and code section

• Critically evaluates if suggestion is:

• Valid: Issue is real, should be fixed

• Invalid: False positive, not applicable

• Partial: Issue valid but fix needs adjustment

3. Fix Valid Issues

• For valid comments: implements fix following existing patterns

• For partial: implements appropriate fix addressing the concern

• Documents why invalid comments are skipped

4. Reply to Each Comment

• Line-specific: gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments/{id}/replies -f body="..."

• General PR-level: Summary comment via gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{pr}/comments

Replies are brief:

• Valid: "Fixed ✅" or "Fixed - [note if approach differs]"

• Invalid: "Skipped - [brief reason]"

• Partial: "Addressed - [note on approach]"

5. Commit and Push

Commits all fixes with descriptive message and pushes.

Evaluation Criteria

• Unused imports: Usually valid - remove them

• Duplicate function calls: Usually valid - cache results

• Performance suggestions: Evaluate if impact is meaningful

• Documentation updates: Valid if docs outdated

• Test mock updates: Valid if mocks don't match implementation

• Refactoring suggestions: Evaluate against KISS/YAGNI

• Security suggestions: Take seriously, verify vulnerability is real

Output

Summary table of all comments addressed:

File:Line Issue Action Reply

1 path.py:42 Unused import Fixed ✅

2 test.py:100 Incorrect mock Fixed ✅

3 utils.py:50 Suggested refactor Skipped Not needed per YAGNI