agentsclimarketplace

Get pr review

Skill getpipher/skills/skills/git-tools/skills/get-pr-review

Retrieve and analyze PR/MR review feedback to improve code qualityFrom its SKILL.md

Install
npx -y skills add getpipher/skills --skill get-pr-review

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

SKILL.md

8.5 KB, ~1.8k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Bismillah! I'll retrieve and analyze the PR/MR review feedback to help you improve your code based on the reviewer's suggestions.

Arguments provided: $ARGUMENTS

Platform Selection

Flags:

  • --github - Fetch PR review from GitHub using gh CLI (default)
  • --gitlab - Fetch MR review from GitLab using glab CLI

Auto-Detection (default):

  • URLs containing github.com → GitHub
  • URLs containing gitlab.com → GitLab
  • Plain numbers → GitHub (default)

Platform Detection Logic

# Parse platform flag or auto-detect from URL
if [[ "$ARGUMENTS" == *"--gitlab"* ]]; then
    PLATFORM="gitlab"
    CLI_TOOL="glab"
    REVIEW_TYPE="merge request"
elif [[ "$ARGUMENTS" == *"--github"* ]]; then
    PLATFORM="github"
    CLI_TOOL="gh"
    REVIEW_TYPE="pull request"
elif [[ "$ARGUMENTS" == *"gitlab.com"* ]]; then
    PLATFORM="gitlab"
    CLI_TOOL="glab"
    REVIEW_TYPE="merge request"
elif [[ "$ARGUMENTS" == *"github.com"* ]]; then
    PLATFORM="github"
    CLI_TOOL="gh"
    REVIEW_TYPE="pull request"
else
    # Default to GitHub for plain numbers
    PLATFORM="github"
    CLI_TOOL="gh"
    REVIEW_TYPE="pull request"
fi

echo "📌 Platform: $PLATFORM ($REVIEW_TYPE review)"

Using with Thinking Mode: mode: think hard

When executing this command with mode: think hard, I will perform an exceptionally deep and comprehensive analysis:

Advanced Review Analysis

  • Deep Context Understanding: Analyze the entire codebase context, not just the PR changes
  • Cross-Reference Analysis: Connect reviewer feedback to broader architectural patterns and project conventions
  • Hidden Issue Detection: Identify potential issues that reviewers might have missed
  • Performance Impact Assessment: Evaluate performance implications of suggested changes
  • Security Review: Conduct security analysis beyond basic review comments
  • Maintainability Evaluation: Assess long-term code maintainability implications

Reviewer Psychology & Communication

  • Intent Interpretation: Deeply analyze the underlying intent behind each reviewer comment
  • Communication Style Analysis: Understand reviewer preferences and communication patterns
  • Priority Inference: Determine true urgency levels beyond surface-level feedback
  • Relationship Dynamics: Consider team dynamics and reviewer expertise areas

Strategic Implementation Planning

  • Multi-Level Solution Analysis: Explore multiple approaches for each piece of feedback
  • Dependency Mapping: Create detailed dependency graphs for implementation order
  • Risk Assessment Matrix: Evaluate risks and benefits of each potential change
  • Future-Proofing: Consider how changes will affect future development and scalability

Advanced Code Quality Enhancement

  • Pattern Recognition: Identify recurring patterns in feedback for systematic improvements
  • Best Practice Synthesis: Combine reviewer suggestions with industry best practices
  • Optimization Opportunities: Find performance and efficiency improvements beyond the review scope
  • Technical Debt Analysis: Evaluate and address technical debt highlighted by review feedback

This intensive analysis ensures not just addressing review feedback, but elevating the entire codebase quality and team collaboration effectiveness.

Let me:

  1. Identify and fetch the PR/MR review

    • Parse PR/MR number or URL from arguments or detect current branch's PR/MR
    • Use appropriate CLI based on platform:
      • GitHub: gh pr view <number> --json reviews,comments
      • GitLab: glab mr view <number> and glab api for discussions
    • Retrieve all review threads, suggestions, and approval status
  2. Analyze the review feedback comprehensively

    • Identify Claude agent reviews vs. human reviews for specialized handling
    • Categorize feedback by type (bugs, improvements, style, architecture, security)
    • Distinguish between critical issues that must be addressed vs. suggestions
    • Extract specific code locations and recommended changes with line numbers
    • Assess overall review sentiment and approval likelihood
    • Parse Claude agent's structured feedback format and recommendations
  3. Create actionable improvement plan

    • Prioritize feedback items by impact and effort required
    • Generate specific code changes needed for each comment
    • Suggest commit organization for addressing feedback
    • Identify any breaking changes or architectural considerations
  4. Provide clear recommendations

    • If review is positive: Highlight what's working well, celebrate good practices, note minor improvements
    • If Claude agent found the code satisfactory: Summarize positive aspects and readiness for merge
    • If review needs work: Create step-by-step action items with specific code examples
    • For Claude agent feedback: Interpret AI suggestions in context of best practices
    • Suggest response strategy for reviewer comments and how to address concerns
    • Estimate time and complexity for implementing each change
    • Recommend whether to request re-review after changes
  5. Generate implementation roadmap

    • Break down changes into logical, atomic commits with clear messages
    • Suggest order of implementation to minimize conflicts and build failures
    • Identify dependencies between different feedback items
    • Provide templates for updating PR description with changes made
    • Include testing strategy for validating fixes
    • Suggest documentation updates if needed
  6. Execute and verify improvements

    • Apply high-priority fixes immediately where possible
    • Run existing tests to ensure no regressions
    • Validate that feedback has been properly addressed
    • Prepare summary of changes made for reviewer response
  7. Commit and push improvements

    • Stage all implemented changes with git add .
    • Create descriptive commit message summarizing the addressed feedback
    • Use format: "address PR feedback: [specific changes made]"
    • Push changes to remote branch to update the PR
    • Ensure all improvements are visible to reviewers before requesting re-review
  8. Conditional re-review request (SMART EXECUTION)

    IF changes were made:

    • MANDATORY: Post re-review request comment using appropriate CLI
    • Use exact format: "@claude I've addressed the review feedback. Please re-review the changes:"
    • Include specific changes made with file:line references
    • List all modified files
    • End with "Ready for re-review ✅"
    • Verify comment was posted successfully

    IF NO changes were made:

    • Report to user only - NO PR/MR comment needed
    • Provide summary: "Analysis complete: No improvements required"
    • Explain why no changes were needed (already implemented, meets standards, etc.)
    • Confirm PR/MR is ready for merge
    • Note: "No re-review request posted (no changes made)"

    Implementation Logic:

    # Track if any changes were made during the process
    CHANGES_MADE=false
    
    # After each improvement attempt, check for actual changes
    if ! git diff --quiet HEAD~1 HEAD; then
        CHANGES_MADE=true
    fi
    
    # Final decision - only ping @claude if changes exist
    if [ "$CHANGES_MADE" = true ]; then
        if [ "$PLATFORM" = "github" ]; then
            gh pr comment $PR_NUMBER --body "@claude I've addressed the review feedback..."
        else
            glab mr note $MR_NUMBER --message "@claude I've addressed the review feedback..."
        fi
    else
        echo "✅ Analysis complete: No improvements required - reporting to user only"
    fi
    
  9. Provide suggested improvements

    • Based on deep analysis, present additional code quality improvements beyond the review feedback
    • Suggest architectural enhancements, performance optimizations, or maintainability improvements
    • Recommend best practices that could elevate the code further
    • Offer insights on patterns, testing strategies, or documentation that could benefit the codebase

Usage Examples

# Get GitHub PR review (default)
/git:get-pr-review 42

# Get GitHub PR review (explicit)
/git:get-pr-review 123 --github

# Get GitLab MR review
/git:get-pr-review 45 --gitlab

# Auto-detect from GitHub URL
/git:get-pr-review https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/15

# Auto-detect from GitLab URL
/git:get-pr-review https://gitlab.com/owner/repo/-/merge_requests/45

Alhamdulillah, let me fetch and analyze the review feedback to help you create an excellent PR/MR!

What ships with it

Read from the repository

Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 325,949. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.