Process Pr

Process PR

Read PR review comments and act accordingly: if approved, create follow-up issues and merge; if changes requested, re-run implementation.

Announce at start: "Using process-pr to process PR #$1 for issue #$2"

Arguments:

• $1 — PR number (required)
• $2 — Issue number that the PR addresses (required)
• $3 — Base branch for re-implementation if needed (required)

Examples:

• /process-pr 142 130 aw-next
• /process-pr 456 123 main

Process

digraph process_pr {
    rankdir=TB;
    node [shape=box];

    validate [label="1. Validate inputs"];
    fetch [label="2. Fetch PR & review comments"];
    check [label="3. Check review status"];

    approved [label="Approved path"];
    changes [label="Changes requested path"];

    merge [label="4a. Squash merge PR"];
    comment [label="4b. Comment on issue"];
    close [label="4c. Close issue"];
    delete [label="4d. Delete branch"];
    parse [label="4e. Parse comments for follow-ups"];
    create_issues [label="4f. Create follow-up issues"];

    rerun [label="5. Re-run /implement-issue"];

    output_success [label="Output: Success summary"];
    output_rerun [label="Output: Re-implementation started"];

    validate -> fetch -> check;
    check -> approved [label="approved"];
    check -> changes [label="changes requested"];

    approved -> merge -> comment -> close -> delete -> parse -> create_issues -> output_success;
    changes -> rerun -> output_rerun;
}

Why merge first: Follow-up issues should only be created if the merge succeeds. Creating issues before merge can leave orphaned issues if merge fails (conflict, permissions, etc.). Merging first ensures we only create follow-ups for work that actually landed.

Step 1: Validate Inputs

# Verify PR exists and is open
gh pr view $PR_NUMBER --json state,number,title,headRefName,reviews

# Verify issue exists and is open
gh issue view $ISSUE_NUMBER --json state,number,title

If validation fails: Stop and report error.

Step 2: Fetch PR & Comments

# Get PR with comments
gh pr view $PR_NUMBER --json number,title,state,headRefName,comments

# Also get the full PR view with comments for parsing
gh pr view $PR_NUMBER --repo OWNER/REPO --comments

Extract:

• All PR comments (for review status and follow-up issue extraction)
• PR metadata (title, branch, state)

Step 3: Parse Review Status from Comments

IMPORTANT: Review status is embedded in PR comments by the implement-issue skill. Use this explicit algorithm:

Step 3a: Fetch all PR comments

# Get comments as JSON array
COMMENTS=$(gh pr view $PR_NUMBER --json comments --jq '.comments[].body')

Step 3b: Extract status from comments (most recent wins)

# Parse status using explicit algorithm
parse_review_status() {
    local comments="$1"
    local status=""

    # Process comments in order (last one wins)
    while IFS= read -r comment; do
        # Check for markdown bold format first (preferred)
        if echo "$comment" | grep -q '\*\*Status: APPROVED\*\*'; then
            status="APPROVED"
        elif echo "$comment" | grep -q '\*\*Status: CHANGES_REQUESTED\*\*'; then
            status="CHANGES_REQUESTED"
        # Fallback to plain text format
        elif echo "$comment" | grep -q 'Status: APPROVED'; then
            status="APPROVED"
        elif echo "$comment" | grep -q 'Status: CHANGES_REQUESTED'; then
            status="CHANGES_REQUESTED"
        fi
    done <<< "$comments"

    echo "$status"
}

REVIEW_STATUS=$(parse_review_status "$COMMENTS")

Step 3c: Validate status

if [ -z "$REVIEW_STATUS" ]; then
    echo "ERROR: No review status found in PR #$PR_NUMBER comments"
    echo "Expected: Comment containing '**Status: APPROVED**' or '**Status: CHANGES_REQUESTED**'"
    exit 1
fi

echo "Review status: $REVIEW_STATUS"

Status priority:

1. **Status: APPROVED** (markdown bold - preferred)
2. **Status: CHANGES_REQUESTED** (markdown bold - preferred)
3. Status: APPROVED (plain text - fallback)
4. Status: CHANGES_REQUESTED (plain text - fallback)

Multiple reviews: The algorithm processes comments in chronological order. The LAST status found wins, representing the most recent review.

If Approved: Merge Path

Step 4a: Squash Merge PR

gh pr merge $PR_NUMBER \
  --squash \
  --delete-branch

If merge fails:

• Log error with reason
• Stop - do not proceed to close issue or create follow-ups
• Return failure status

Step 4b: Comment on Issue

gh issue comment $ISSUE_NUMBER --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Completed

Resolved via PR #$PR_NUMBER (squash merged).

### Follow-up issues created:
- #XXX - Description
- #YYY - Description

(Or "No follow-up issues needed.")
EOF
)"

Step 4c: Close Issue

gh issue close $ISSUE_NUMBER

Verify closure:

gh issue view $ISSUE_NUMBER --json state

Step 4d: Delete Branch

The --delete-branch flag handles this. Verify:

git ls-remote --heads origin $BRANCH_NAME

If still exists:

git push origin --delete $BRANCH_NAME

Step 4e: Parse Comments for Follow-up Issues

Scan all review comments for indicators of follow-up work:

Trigger phrases:

• "create issue for..."
• "follow-up needed:"
• "out of scope but should..."
• "technical debt:"
• "future improvement:"
• "TODO:" (in comments, not code)
• "nice to have:"
• "consider adding:"

Extract for each:

• Title (short description)
• Body (full context from comment)
• Labels (inferred: bug, enhancement, tech-debt)

Step 4f: Create Follow-up Issues

For each extracted issue:

gh issue create \
  --repo OWNER/REPO \
  --title "$ISSUE_TITLE" \
  --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Context
Created from code review of PR #$PR_NUMBER (Issue #$ISSUE_NUMBER)

## Description
$EXTRACTED_DESCRIPTION

## References
- Parent Issue: #$ISSUE_NUMBER
- PR: #$PR_NUMBER
- Reviewer: @$REVIEWER
EOF
)" \
  --label "$LABELS"

Log each: Created follow-up issue #XXX: "$TITLE"

If Changes Requested: Re-implementation Path

Step 5: Re-run implement-issue

When the code reviewer requests changes, spawn a new implementation session:

claude --dangerously-skip-permissions \
  --print \
  "/implement-issue $ISSUE_NUMBER $BASE_BRANCH" \
  2>&1 | tee -a logs/process-pr-rerun-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S).log

Notes:

• The implement-issue skill will:
  • Read the existing PR and review comments
  • Address the requested changes
  • Push to the same branch (updating the PR)
  • Run code review again
• After implement-issue completes, call /process-pr again to check the new review

Log:

Changes requested on PR #$PR_NUMBER. Re-running implementation for issue #$ISSUE_NUMBER...

Output

Success (Approved & Merged)

## Process PR Complete

**PR:** #$PR_NUMBER
**Issue:** #$ISSUE_NUMBER
**Status:** ✅ Merged

### Actions Taken
- [x] Review status: APPROVED
- [x] Created N follow-up issues
- [x] PR squash merged
- [x] Issue #$ISSUE_NUMBER closed
- [x] Branch deleted

### Follow-up Issues Created
| Issue | Title | Labels |
|-------|-------|--------|
| #XXX | Description | enhancement |

Re-implementation (Changes Requested)

## Process PR: Changes Requested

**PR:** #$PR_NUMBER
**Issue:** #$ISSUE_NUMBER
**Status:** 🔄 Re-implementing

### Review Feedback
$REVIEW_COMMENTS_SUMMARY

### Action
Re-running /implement-issue $ISSUE_NUMBER $BASE_BRANCH to address requested changes.

Error Handling

Integration

Called by:

• handle-issues skill (after implement-issue creates PR)
• User directly via /process-pr <pr> <issue> <branch>

Calls:

• /implement-issue (when changes requested)

Requires:

• gh CLI authenticated
• PR must exist with a code review comment containing **Status: APPROVED** or **Status: CHANGES_REQUESTED**
• Issue must exist and be open

Example Sessions

Approved PR

User: /process-pr 142 130 aw-next

Claude: Using process-pr to process PR #142 for issue #130

Validating... PR #142 open, Issue #130 open
Parsing comments... Status: APPROVED, 1 follow-up found
Creating issue #145: "Add rate limiting to auth endpoint"
Merging PR #142... Squash merge successful
Closing issue #130... done
Deleting branch issue-130-auth-redirect... done

## Process PR Complete
PR: #142 | Issue: #130 | Status: Merged
Follow-up: #145 - Add rate limiting to auth endpoint

Changes Requested

User: /process-pr 142 130 aw-next

Claude: Using process-pr to process PR #142 for issue #130

Validating... PR #142 open, Issue #130 open
Parsing comments... Status: CHANGES_REQUESTED
Feedback: "Need to handle edge case when session expires"

Re-running /implement-issue 130 aw-next...
[spawns headless session]

Machine-Readable Result Output

When invoked via batch-orchestrator.sh with --json-schema, this skill's output is parsed for structured data. To ensure reliable extraction, always end your execution with a clear result statement.

Final Result Output

At the very end of execution, output a clear status summary. This helps --json-schema reliably extract the structured output.

On successful merge:

## Result

Status: merged
Follow-up issues: #145, #146

On merge with no follow-ups:

## Result

Status: merged
Follow-up issues: none

On changes requested:

## Result

Status: changes_requested

On error:

## Result

Status: error
Error: Merge failed - conflict with base branch

On rate limit:

## Result

Status: rate_limit
Error: GitHub API rate limit exceeded

Result Schema

The batch-orchestrator.sh uses this JSON schema to extract results:

{
  "type": "object",
  "properties": {
    "status": {"enum": ["merged", "changes_requested", "error", "rate_limit"]},
    "follow_up_issues": {"type": "array", "items": {"type": "integer"}},
    "error": {"type": "string"}
  },
  "required": ["status"]
}

Important: The final result section must be the last significant output. The --json-schema flag asks Claude to summarize the execution according to this schema, so ending with a clear status makes extraction reliable.

Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.