swarm-pr-review

star 351

Run a swarm-like PR review using parallel exploration, independent reviewer validation, and critic challenge. Ingests existing PR comments, detects and resolves merge conflicts, and validates bot/human review findings. Use for deep pull request review with low false-positive tolerance.

zaxbysauce By zaxbysauce schedule Updated 6/16/2026
play_arrow Run Skill in Manus View GitHub

name: swarm-pr-review description: > Claude Code adapter for deep PR review in opencode-swarm. Use when the user wants a broad, read-only PR review with low false-positive tolerance. The canonical protocol lives in .opencode and owns comment ingestion, CI/conflict/staleness intake, parallel explorer lanes, independent reviewer validation, critic challenge, and the explicit handoff into swarm-pr-feedback for approved fix work.

Swarm PR Review

Read and follow ../../../.opencode/skills/swarm-pr-review/SKILL.md as the canonical workflow.

Claude Code Execution Notes

  • PR_REVIEW is read-only with respect to the PR branch. You may fetch refs, inspect metadata, and check out the PR head after verifying a clean working tree, but do not fix code, resolve conflicts, commit, push, rebase, or reset from this mode.
  • Ingest every review signal before explorer lanes: PR comments, review summaries, requested changes, bot findings, CI/check failures, mergeability/conflicts, stale branch/base drift, PR body claims, linked issues, and commit messages.
  • Treat every ingested signal as a claim until reviewer validation proves or disproves it with file:line evidence or explicit counter-evidence.
  • Prefer GitHub connector tools when available, or gh, to inspect PR metadata, comments, review threads, checks, conflicts, and head SHA.
  • Use the canonical deterministic lane flow: dispatch_lanes_async plus collect_lane_results, falling back to blocking dispatch_lanes only when async collection is unavailable.
  • When lane results include output_ref, call parse_lane_candidates and use the structured candidates for reviewer dispatch; degraded or incomplete outputs are coverage gaps.
  • If actionable findings remain, write the handoff artifact described by the canonical skill and ask the user whether to continue with swarm-pr-feedback.

Do not improvise a fix path from review mode. If the user approves follow-up work, switch to swarm-pr-feedback and carry validated findings forward with their original IDs and provenance.

Install via CLI
npx skills add https://github.com/zaxbysauce/opencode-swarm --skill swarm-pr-review
Repository Details
star Stars 351
call_split Forks 35
navigation Branch main
article Path SKILL.md
More from Creator
zaxbysauce
zaxbysauce Explore all skills →