review-pr - SKILL.md Agent Skill

name: review-pr description: Review a PR on action-artifacts (GitHub Action for Scality Artifacts service lifecycle management) argument-hint: disable-model-invocation: true allowed-tools: Read, Bash(gh repo view ), Bash(gh pr view ), Bash(gh pr diff ), Bash(gh pr comment ), Bash(gh api ), Bash(git diff ), Bash(git log ), Bash(git show )

Review GitHub PR

You are an expert code reviewer. Review this PR: $ARGUMENTS

Determine PR target

Parse $ARGUMENTS to extract the repo and PR number:

If arguments contain REPO: and PR_NUMBER: (CI mode), use those values directly.
If the argument is a GitHub URL (starts with https://github.com/), extract owner/repo and the PR number from it.
If the argument is just a number, use the current repo from gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q .nameWithOwner.

Output mode

CI mode (arguments contain REPO: and PR_NUMBER:): post inline comments and summary to GitHub.
Local mode (all other cases): output the review as text directly. Do NOT post anything to GitHub.

Steps

Fetch PR details:

gh pr view <number> --repo <owner/repo> --json title,body,headRefOid,author,files
gh pr diff <number> --repo <owner/repo>

Read changed files to understand the full context around each change (not just the diff hunks).
Analyze the changes against these criteria:

Area	What to check
dist/ sync	If `src/` files changed, `dist/index.js` must also be updated. Missing dist rebuild is a common CI failure.
TypeScript strictness	No `any` casts that bypass type safety, no `!` non-null assertions without justification, proper return type annotations on exported functions.
Async error handling	Uncaught promise rejections, missing `await`, `.catch()` omitted, errors swallowed silently in retry loops (`utils.ts`).
Axios HTTP calls	Check status codes are handled, timeouts are set, error messages surface the upstream response body.
Input validation	New action inputs in `action.yaml` must be reflected in `inputs-artifacts.ts` and `constants.ts`. Required inputs should be validated early; missing required inputs should fail fast with a clear message.
Retry logic	Retried operations should be idempotent; verify new upload/API calls are wrapped with retry where appropriate (`utils.ts` retry helper).
GitHub Actions output	New outputs declared in `action.yaml` must be set via `core.setOutput()`; missing outputs silently break downstream `${{ steps.X.outputs.Y }}` references.
Secrets / credentials	No tokens, passwords, or API keys hardcoded or logged. Ensure artifact credentials (`user`, `password`) are not exposed in log output.
Breaking changes	Changes to `action.yaml` inputs/outputs (renames, removals, type changes) break all callers that pin to this action. Flag anything that changes the public interface.
Security	Command injection via `@actions/exec` if user-controlled input is passed to shell without sanitization. SSRF risk if URLs are constructed from untrusted inputs.

Deliver your review:

If CI mode: post to GitHub

Part A: Inline file comments

For each specific issue, post a comment on the exact file and line:

gh api -X POST -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json" "repos/<owner/repo>/pulls/<number>/comments" -f body="Your comment<br><br>— Claude Code" -f path="path/to/file" -F line=<line_number> -f side="RIGHT" -f commit_id="<headRefOid>"

The command must stay on a single bash line. Never use newlines in bash commands — use   for line breaks in comment bodies. Never put   inside code blocks or suggestion blocks.

Each inline comment must:

Be short and direct — say what's wrong, why it's wrong, and how to fix it in 1-3 sentences
No filler, no complex words, no long explanations
When the fix is a concrete line change (not architectural), include a GitHub suggestion block so the author can apply it in one click:
```
```suggestion
corrected-line-here
```
```
Only suggest when you can show the exact replacement. For architectural or design issues, just describe the problem. Example with a suggestion block:
```
gh api ... -f body=$'Missing the shared-guidelines update command. \n```suggestion\n/plugin update shared-guidelines@scality-agent-hub\n/plugin update scality-skills@scality-agent-hub\n```\n — Claude Code' ...
```
When the comment contains a suggestion block, use $'...' quoting with \n for code fence boundaries. Escape single quotes as \' (e.g., don\'t)
End with: — Claude Code

Use the line number from the new version of the file (the line number you'd see after the PR is merged), which corresponds to the line parameter in the GitHub API.

Part B: Summary comment

gh pr comment <number> --repo <owner/repo> --body "LGTM<br><br>Review by Claude Code"

The command must stay on a single bash line. Never use newlines in bash commands — use   for line breaks in comment bodies.

Do not describe or summarize the PR. For each issue, state the problem on one line, then list one or more suggestions below it:

- <issue>
  - <suggestion>
  - <suggestion>

If no issues: just say "LGTM". End with: Review by Claude Code

If local mode: output the review as text

Do NOT post anything to GitHub. Instead, output the review directly as text.

For each issue found, output:

**<file_path>:<line_number>** — <what's wrong and how to fix it>

When the fix is a concrete line change, include a fenced code block showing the suggested replacement.

At the end, output a summary section listing all issues. If no issues: just say "LGTM".

End with: Review by Claude Code

What NOT to do

Do not comment on markdown formatting preferences
Do not suggest refactors unrelated to the PR's purpose
Do not praise code — only flag problems or stay silent
If no issues are found, post only a summary saying "LGTM"
Do not flag style issues already covered by the project's linter (eslint, prettier)