Results for “pull-request-review”

Create, refresh, and rewrite PR titles and descriptions following Sentry conventions, focusing on reviewer-facing content that describes the full branch diff.

Open a GitHub PR with a tight body — why this change, what'll surprise the reviewer, how we know it's correct — or add a pull_request_template to a repo. Use when asked to open, create, or draft a pull request, compose or regenerate a PR description, or scaffold a repo's PR template. Composes the Summary/Gotchas/Verification structure and detects an existing template first.

Manage GitHub repositories via the gh CLI: triage issues, review PRs, debug CI failures, create releases, and monitor security alerts.

Realize análises de código seguindo as práticas de engenharia da Sentry. Use ao revisar pull requests, examinar alterações de código ou fornecer feedback sobre qualidade de código. Abrange segurança, performance, testes e revisão de design.

Reviews and hardens GitHub Actions workflows against injection, privilege escalation, supply-chain, and token-scoping risks that pattern matchers miss.

Manages GitHub repositories via the gh CLI: triaging issues, reviewing PRs, debugging CI failures, preparing releases, and monitoring security alerts.

Learn Git workflow patterns including branching strategies, commit conventions, merge vs rebase, conflict resolution, and collaborative development best practices for teams of all sizes.

Checks a GitHub, GitLab, or Perforce (p4) pull request (or merge request, or shelved changelist) for unresolved review comments, failing status checks, and incomplete PR descriptions. Waits for pending checks to complete, categorizes issues as actionable or informational, and optionally fixes and resolves them. Use when the user wants to check a PR/MR/CL, address review feedback, or prepare a change for submission.

Run a full pull request review and post review comments directly to the current branch's GitHub PR. Requires the gh CLI to be installed and a PR to already exist for the current branch. Use when you want review feedback posted to GitHub as PR comments. For local code review without posting to GitHub, use code-review instead. Does not write or update PR descriptions — use update-pr-description for that.

Reviews pull requests and local diffs against Google's eng-practices code review guide (design, complexity, tests, naming, comments, style, consistency, documentation, every-line, context) and emits a ranked, principle-tagged finding list with rich local diff rendering. Optional follow-up step posts selected findings as a GitHub PR review. Invoke when the user says "googly-eyes this PR", "review by the canon", "principled code review", "Google-style review", "review this CL", or pastes a PR URL and asks for a code review. 👀

Handles git and GitHub operations using the gh CLI, triggered by any github.com URL. Covers creating and reviewing PRs, watching CI checks, interactive rebasing, branch cleanup, submodule management, and repository archaeology.

General GitHub workflow — branching, commits, pull requests, code review, secrets hygiene, submodules, and git worktrees. Use when the user wants to save changes, push to GitHub, open a PR, work with a submodule, set up a worktree, or perform any git/GitHub operation.

Run a comprehensive code review on local source files. Use this skill when the user asks to review, audit, inspect, evaluate, or check code, even if they never use the word "review." Does not post comments to GitHub pull requests — use post-code-review-to-pr for that. Does not analyze architectural structure or module boundaries — use architectural-analysis for that. Does not explain code or a PR to build understanding before reviewing — use code-overview for a written overview, or code-walkthrough to be paced through it one step at a time. Does not capture feedback on Han's own skills — use han-feedback for that.

Write readable, maintainable code through disciplined naming, small functions, and clean error handling. Use when the user mentions "code review", "naming conventions", "function too long", "code smells", "readable code", "boy scout rule", "single responsibility", or "unit test quality". Also trigger when reviewing pull requests for readability, refactoring messy functions, debating comment styles, or improving error handling patterns. Covers SRP, comment discipline, formatting, and unit testing. For refactoring techniques, see refactoring-patterns. For architecture, see clean-architecture.

Author pull requests with intent-separated commits, blast-radius disclosure, and verification evidence. Load when opening a PR, writing a PR description, separating refactor from feature commits, or summarizing a change set for review. Also triggers on "write the PR", "PR body", "intent-separated commits", "split refactor from feature", "pr summary", or after safe-change cycles complete. Extends git-workflow-and-versioning — does not replace it.

Break a work-items.md file (produced by /plan-work-items) into independently-grabbable GitHub issues, one per slice, in each slice's target repo. Use when you want to turn a work-items file into GitHub issues, publish work items as issue tickets, or create implementation tickets that can be worked on and tracked on GitHub. Does not produce the work-items file itself — use plan-work-items to break a plan into work items first. Does not review code or post pull request comments — use post-code-review-to-pr for that.

| Use when starting a chain from a GitHub issue — turning an issue URL or number into a triaged, planned, dispatched, and reviewed pull request. Classifies the thread (bug → root-cause discipline, feature → plan chain, question → drafted reply), synthesizes a spec from the issue's own acceptance criteria, then runs the standard chain with a PR exit. Trigger with /hyperflow:issue, "work on issue #N", "fix this issue <url>", "implement this issue", "triage issue #N and raise a PR".

Decentralized git for AI agents and humans. Use when the user wants to create repositories, push code, open pull requests, review and merge PRs, manage issues, create or claim bounties, delegate tasks to other agents, register human-readable names on Base L2, or interact with the gitlawb decentralized git network. Supports cryptographic DID identities, Ed25519-signed pushes, UCAN capability delegation, libp2p networking, and 31+ MCP tools for AI agent integration. Do NOT use for GitHub, GitLab, or other centralized git hosts.

Watch one or more GitHub repositories for new issues, pull requests, comments, PR reviews, and inline diff comments — emits a fresh turn each time something actionable happens. Use when you've opened PRs / issues mimir should know about review activity for, when you want operator-actionable signals for repos mimir maintains, or when you need to track upstream activity on a watched repo. Filters out events authored by mimir's own GitHub identity (set ``MIMIR_GITHUB_SELF_LOGIN``) so the bot doesn't wake itself with its own comments. Companion to the ``pollers`` framework skill (mechanics) and the ``world-scanning`` skill (catalog of *what's worth polling*). Opt-in: copy this directory into ``<home>/skills/github-poller/`` then set the env vars below.

Walks a person through code changes one step at a time in conversation, starting at the entry point and following the flow that changes, showing a small chunk per step and explaining it in plain language. Defaults to the current branch's changes, and walks the code from the perspective of any context provided instead — a file, directory, symbol, pull request, plan, or ticket. Use when someone wants to be walked through, taught, paced through, or shown around code or a branch step by step, or to learn how a change works before reviewing or extending it. Stops after every step and waits, so the learner sets the pace. Paces through code that already exists and builds nothing — to build new work while being paced through it, use pairing. Does not produce a written overview to read alone — use code-overview. Does not review code quality — use code-review. Does not diagnose bugs — use investigate.

Produces a human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.

Designs the contract for an API change inside one codebase — a component's props, a function surface, URL or query parameters, an event payload, or a module boundary — through a discovery pass, an options document with one recommendation, a question round, and an adversarial validation round, with every element of the contract justified from one stated goal. Use when you want to design, shape, decide, or nail down an interface, contract, signature, or API change for a capability you can already describe, sized for roughly one pull request. Produces a design document and changes no code. Does not specify what a feature should do — use plan-a-feature. Does not plan delivery or sequencing — use plan-implementation. Does not assess the architecture of existing code — use architectural-analysis. Does not write the code — use tdd. Does not restructure existing code — use refactor. Runs its rounds without pausing for review; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.