cloudthinker-ai Managing Crucible
Overview
Manage Atlassian Crucible code review workflows, including review creation, commenting, approval workflows, and integration with Jira and Bitbucket/Stash.
Key Capabilities
- Create and manage code reviews with multiple changesets
- Configure review templates and default reviewers
- Manage commenting and defect tracking within reviews
- Set up approval workflows and completion conditions
- Integrate with Jira for review-to-issue traceability
- Configure notifications and review reminders
Workflow
1 — Review Configuration
REVIEW SETUP
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Review type: changeset / patch / snippet
[ ] Project: ___
[ ] Default moderator: ___
[ ] Default reviewers: ___
[ ] Allow self-review: YES / NO
[ ] Review template: ___
[ ] Jira issue linkage: required / optional / disabled
2 — Approval Workflow
APPROVAL WORKFLOW
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Review states:
Draft -> Under Review -> Summarized -> Closed
[ ] Require all reviewers to complete: YES / NO
[ ] Minimum approvals for completion: ___
[ ] Allow close with open defects: YES / NO
[ ] Require moderator summarization: YES / NO
[ ] Auto-close after ___ days of inactivity
3 — Comment and Defect Tracking
COMMENTING POLICY
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Comment classifications:
[ ] Defect — Must fix before approval
[ ] Comment — Informational, no action required
[ ] Question — Requires author response
[ ] Inline comments on specific lines: YES / NO
[ ] General review comments: YES / NO
[ ] Defect severity levels: critical / major / minor
[ ] Create Jira issues from defects: YES / NO
Common Operations
List Active Reviews
Query open reviews, filter by project, reviewer, or author.
Review Metrics
Track review completion rates, defect density, and reviewer participation.
Jira Integration
Link reviews to Jira issues and track review status from issue context.
Troubleshooting
| Issue | Cause | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Review not starting | Missing reviewers | Add at least one reviewer before starting |
| Cannot close review | Open defects remain | Resolve or downgrade all defect comments |
| Jira link missing | Integration not configured | Configure Crucible-Jira application link |
| Notifications not sent | Email settings | Verify SMTP and user notification preferences |
Output Format
Present results as a structured report:
Managing Crucible Report
════════════════════════
Resources discovered: [count]
Resource Status Key Metric Issues
──────────────────────────────────────────────
[name] [ok/warn] [value] [findings]
Summary: [total] resources | [ok] healthy | [warn] warnings | [crit] critical
Action Items: [list of prioritized findings]
Target ≤50 lines of output. Use tables for multi-resource comparisons.
Anti-Hallucination Rules
- NEVER assume resource names — always discover via CLI/API in Phase 1 before referencing in Phase 2.
- NEVER fabricate metric names or dimensions — verify against the service documentation or
--helpoutput. - NEVER mix CLI commands between service versions — confirm which version/API you are targeting.
- ALWAYS use the discovery → verify → analyze chain — every resource referenced must have been discovered first.
- ALWAYS handle empty results gracefully — an empty response is valid data, not an error to retry.
Counter-Rationalizations
| Shortcut | Counter | Why |
|---|---|---|
| "I'll skip discovery and check known resources" | Always run Phase 1 discovery first | Resource names change, new resources appear — assumed names cause errors |
| "The user only asked for a quick check" | Follow the full discovery → analysis flow | Quick checks miss critical issues; structured analysis catches silent failures |
| "Default configuration is probably fine" | Audit configuration explicitly | Defaults often leave logging, security, and optimization features disabled |
| "Metrics aren't needed for this" | Always check relevant metrics when available | API/CLI responses show current state; metrics reveal trends and intermittent issues |
| "I don't have access to that" | Try the command and report the actual error | Assumed permission failures prevent useful investigation; actual errors are informative |