Skip to content

fix(pr-review): post reviews via Pull Request Reviews API, not issue comments #339

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
m0nk111-post wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fix(pr-review): post reviews via Pull Request Reviews API, not issue comments #339

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
32 changes: 31 additions & 1 deletion plugins/pr-review/scripts/prompt.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -74,7 +74,37 @@
PROMPT = """{skill_trigger}
/github-pr-review

When posting a review, keep the review body brief unless your active review instructions require a longer structured format.
## How to Post the Review (CRITICAL — read first)

You MUST post your review via the **GitHub Pull Request Reviews API**, NOT the Issue Comments API. Use exactly one API call whose `comments[]` array contains one entry per finding:

```bash
gh api -X POST repos/{{owner}}/{{repo}}/pulls/{pr_number}/reviews --input /tmp/review.json
```

where `/tmp/review.json` has this shape (one entry per finding, all findings bundled into the same call):

```json
{{
"commit_id": "<HEAD SHA>",
"event": "COMMENT",
"body": "Brief 1–3 sentence summary. Inline comments below.",
"comments": [
{{
"path": "api/auth.py",
"line": 87,
"side": "RIGHT",
"body": "## 🟠 Important: JWT signature not verified\n\nForged tokens pass because `jwt.decode()` is called without the secret.\n\n---\n\n`jwt.decode()` requires both the secret and the allowed `algorithms` list.\n\nBest fix in this file (`api/auth.py:87`): pass `SECRET_KEY` and `algorithms=[\"HS256\"]`.\n\nNo new methods or dependencies needed.\n\n```suggestion\ntoken_data = jwt.decode(token, SECRET_KEY, algorithms=[\"HS256\"])\n```"
}}
]
}}
```

Each `comments[i].body` starts with `## <🔴 Critical|🟠 Important|🟡 Suggestion> <Category>`, then a one-line statement of the issue, a `---` separator, a general fix explanation, a "Best fix in this file (`<path:line>`)" anchor, a scope confirmation ("No logic changes, new methods, or dependency changes are needed."), and ends with a ` ```suggestion ``` ` block for one-click apply. Never use `🟢` priority labels — if the code is fine, do not comment on it.

**Do NOT** use `gh pr comment`, `POST /issues/{{n}}/comments`, or any path that produces a single issue-level comment. That yields a blob in the PR conversation with no diff anchoring, no suggestion blocks, and no per-finding threading — it is a bug, not a stylistic choice. The Pull Request Reviews API is the only acceptable submission path. Use the `line` (1-based) and `side: "RIGHT"` of the new file as shown in the diff.

When posting a review, keep the top-level `body` brief unless your active review instructions require a longer structured format.

For dependency update PRs, do **NOT** approve a target version that was published less than 7 days ago.

Expand Down
Loading
Loading