Changes Requested

Changes-Requested Remediation

Execute a disciplined remediation loop for an open pull request that received a CHANGES_REQUESTED verdict from code-review, hard-review, devils-advocate-review, or a human maintainer.

Prerequisite skills: publish-pr-handback

All AgentOps skills are installed together in one skills directory. If publish-pr-handback is unavailable, stop and report REQUIRED_SKILL_MISSING publish-pr-handback; do not publish a free-form handback. Use python for the helpers; where that name is missing use python3 or py -3. They run natively on Windows, macOS, and Linux.

This skill applies only to a PR you authored. If the PR was authored by another identity, do not push to its branch: post findings or suggestions as PR comments and stop, so authorship and independent review stay separate.

Core Rules

1. Never amend or force-push published review heads. Follow-up commits must be added on top of the branch.
2. Never dismiss or self-resolve a reviewer finding without a reproducing test and code evidence.
3. Reproduce before fixing: write a discriminating negative test or minimal probe proving the defect on the reviewed head before modifying production code.
4. Preserve task boundaries: fix only the cited defects and adjacent regressions. Do not widen task scope or invent architecture.
5. Publish via handback: return the PR to its review-ready state atomically using publish-pr-handback.
6. Permission to remediate never authorises a merge, a push to a protected branch, deleting a branch, a credential change, or bypassing a required check.

Remediation Workflow

Fetch Findings → Pin Reviewed Head → Reproduce Red → Fix Green → Pre-Flight → Handback

1. Ingest Review Findings

Query GitHub for the latest review and unresolved threads. Write the ledger outside the repository so it does not dirty the worktree the pre-flight requires to be clean:

python <skill-dir>/scripts/fetch_review_findings.py --repo <owner/repo> --pr <number> --output <external-dir>/review-remediation-ledger.md

scripts/fetch_review_findings.py keeps verdicts and discussion apart. An independent reviewer's outstanding CHANGES_REQUESTED stays in the ledger, with its formal review body, until that same reviewer approves it or it is dismissed. A comment-only review, including the author's own replies, is listed under Discussion and never supersedes a blocking verdict; another reviewer's approval does not clear someone else's blocker; and the PR author's own reviews carry no verdict. Reviews are ordered by server timestamp then review ID. It reads unresolved review threads (GraphQL, falling back to REST comments), and flags a review or summary comment pinned to a head older than the live PR head as STALE. A blocker on an older head stays outstanding and is marked stale. Add --json for machine-readable output, which includes blocking_reviews and discussion.

Verify:

• the PR is open and the branch matches;
• Reviewed Head equals the commit SHA evaluated in the latest review, and any STALE warning is understood;
• every inline comment and contradiction-ledger item is accounted for.

2. Pin the Author Worktree

Ensure the local worktree is clean and on the exact PR branch:

git checkout <pr-branch>
git pull --ff-only
git rev-parse HEAD
git status --porcelain=v1

The printed HEAD must equal the reviewed head SHA. If local commits exist beyond the reviewed head, inspect them before proceeding. Do not build fixes on uncoordinated branch state.

3. Build the Remediation Plan

For each unresolved finding, identify:

1. Root cause: the exact condition causing failure (for example an empty collection passing all(), a dropped status filter, or branch contamination).
2. Reproduction: a focused test that fails at the current reviewed head (RED).
3. Minimal fix: the smallest safe change satisfying the requirement and preserving fail-closed behaviour.
4. Negative controls: values that must remain rejected.

4. Execute Red-to-Green Remediation

For each finding:

1. Write the reproduction test at the public interface or production seam. Run it against the unmodified code and confirm it fails as expected (RED).
2. Apply the minimal correction to authorised files inside task scope. Run the test again and confirm it passes (GREEN).
3. Check adjacent boundaries: test zero, one, many; test boundary values (t - ε, t, t + ε); check that valid inputs are not broken and invalid inputs do not fall through to defaults.

5. Clean-Head Pre-Flight

Before committing, run and record each of these:

1. git status --porcelain=v1 --untracked-files=all shows no untracked junk;
2. git diff --check <base>...HEAD reports no whitespace or formatting errors;
3. the repository-mandated linters and type checks;
4. the repository-mandated full test suite.

Every mandated test command must complete with exit code 0, with 0 failures and 0 unexpected errors. Skips or xfails must be explicitly justified.

6. Commit and Push

Stage and commit follow-up changes with a message that traces to the review findings, then push the PR branch (never a protected branch, never with force):

git add <modified-files>
git commit -m "fix: address review findings on <finding-summary>"
git push origin <pr-branch>

Record the new branch head SHA (git rev-parse HEAD).

7. Publish PR Handback

Construct an author-handback.v1 packet (see publish-pr-handback), outside the worktree, populating review_findings with one entry per finding:

{
  "schema_version": "author-handback.v1",
  "task": "<task-id>",
  "repository": "<owner/repo>",
  "pr": 123,
  "head": "<new-head-sha>",
  "base": "<base-sha>",
  "changed_paths": ["<live PR changed paths>"],
  "validation_runs": [],
  "acceptance": [],
  "review_findings": [
    {
      "finding": "Inline comment <id>: empty allowed_paths list accepted",
      "disposition": "Enforced a non-empty list and stripped-string validation",
      "evidence": "tests/test_contracts.py::test_empty_contracts_rejected PASS at <new-head-sha>"
    }
  ],
  "remaining_risks": []
}

Populate validation_runs and acceptance exactly as publish-pr-handback requires; the empty lists above only show the shape. Publish with that skill's handback publisher, then confirm AUTHOR_HANDBACK_PUBLICATION=PASS is printed. Stop and wait for independent re-review.