Cr

CodeRabbit Review

Fetch CodeRabbit review comments from the current PR and address them with judgement.

Usage

• /cr - Fetch comments for current branch's PR
• /cr 556 - Fetch comments for a specific PR

Steps

1. Detect PR

# If no argument, detect from current branch
gh pr list --head "$(git branch --show-current)" --json number,url -q '.[0]'

If no PR found, tell the user and stop.

2. Fetch CodeRabbit comments

REPO="$(gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q '.nameWithOwner')"
PR_NUMBER="${1:-$(gh pr list --head "$(git branch --show-current)" --json number -q '.[0].number')}"

# Inline comments (most actionable)
gh api "repos/${REPO}/pulls/${PR_NUMBER}/comments" --paginate \
  | jq -s '[.[][] | select(.user.login == "coderabbitai[bot]") | {id, path, line, body, html_url}]'

# Review summary (fallback if no inline comments)
gh api "repos/${REPO}/pulls/${PR_NUMBER}/reviews" \
  | jq '[.[] | select(.user.login == "coderabbitai[bot]") | {id, state, body}]'

3. Grade and present findings

For each comment, read the actual code and CLAUDE.md conventions, then assign your own grade A-F with a score out of 100. Do NOT parrot CodeRabbit's severity markers — apply independent judgement.

Grading scale:

• A (90-100) — Real bug, security issue, or will break at runtime. Fix this.
• B (75-89) — Legitimate improvement, meaningful code quality gain.
• C (50-74) — Valid point but low impact. Fix if convenient.
• D (25-49) — Overly cautious or stylistic preference that doesn't match project conventions.
• F (0-24) — Pedantic, wrong, or conflicts with project patterns. Ignore.

Display each comment in a numbered list with grade and score:

1. B 78 files/zsh/git.zsh:8 — run_id can be literal "null", guard needed
2. F 15 files/gh-dash/config.yml:81 — suggests removing Octo config (unrelated cleanup)

If no CodeRabbit comments found, say so and stop.

4. User decides

Ask the user which comments to address. Accept:

• all — address every comment
• 1, 3 — specific numbers
• skip — done, don't fix anything
• Or freeform like "fix the first one, ignore the nitpick"

5. Apply fixes with judgement

For each selected comment:

1. Read the file and surrounding code
2. Evaluate whether CodeRabbit's suggestion is correct and appropriate
3. If valid: apply the fix
4. If disagree: explain why and skip it (e.g., "CodeRabbit suggests X but this is intentional because Y")
5. Show what was changed

Do NOT blindly apply suggestions. Use the project's CLAUDE.md conventions and your own judgement. CodeRabbit can be wrong, overly pedantic, or suggest changes that conflict with project patterns.

6. Summary

After addressing comments, show a summary:

Fixed: 1, 2
Skipped: 3 (nitpick, not worth the churn)