Ci monitoring

Skill troykelly/claude-skills/skills/ci-monitoring

Use after creating PR - monitor CI pipeline, resolve failures, address review feedback, and merge when all gates passFrom its SKILL.md

Install

npx -y skills add troykelly/claude-skills --skill ci-monitoring

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

2 things to look at

no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
11 stars11 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

3.7 KB, 919 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

CI Monitoring

Monitor CI pipeline, resolve failures, address review feedback, and merge when ready.

Core principle: CI failures AND unresolved review feedback are blockers.

Announce: "I'm monitoring CI and review feedback, and will resolve any issues before merging."

The Loop

PR Created
     │
     ▼
┌─────────────┐
│ Wait for CI │
└──────┬──────┘
       │
   ┌───┴───┐
   │       │
 Green   Red ──► Fix → Push → Loop back
   │
   ▼
┌──────────────────────┐
│ Unresolved Reviews?  │
└──────────┬───────────┘
       ┌───┴───┐
       │       │
     None    Yes ──► For each: Evaluate → Fix/Pushback → Reply → Resolve → Push → Loop back
       │
       ▼
┌─────────────┐
│ MERGE PR    │
└─────────────┘

Gate: Green CI + No Unresolved Reviews = Merge

When both conditions met, merge immediately:

gh pr merge [PR_NUMBER] --squash --delete-branch
gh issue edit [ISSUE_NUMBER] --remove-label "status:in-review" --add-label "status:done"

Do NOT stop to report or ask. Continue to next issue.

Exception: PRs with do-not-merge label.

Checking CI

gh pr checks [PR_NUMBER]
gh pr checks [PR_NUMBER] --watch

Handling CI Failures

Identify: gh run view [RUN_ID] --log-failed
Reproduce locally
Fix and push
Wait for CI, repeat if needed

Detailed patterns: See reference/ci-failures.md

Handling Review Feedback

After CI green, check for unresolved threads:

gh api graphql -f query='
query($owner: String!, $repo: String!, $pr: Int!) {
  repository(owner: $owner, name: $repo) {
    pullRequest(number: $pr) {
      reviewThreads(first: 100) {
        nodes { id isResolved isOutdated comments(first: 1) { nodes { body author { login } path } } }
      }
    }
  }
}' -f owner="[OWNER]" -f repo="[REPO]" -F pr=[PR_NUMBER]

For each unresolved thread (isResolved: false):

Step	Action
1	Read and understand feedback
2	Verify: technically valid for this codebase?
3	Fix, defer (with issue), or push back with reasoning
4	Reply in thread: `gh api repos/.../pulls/.../comments/[ID]/replies -f body="..."`
5	Resolve: `gh api graphql -f query='mutation { resolveReviewThread(...) }'`
6	Push fixes, loop back to CI

Detailed commands: See reference/review-feedback.md

Security Feedback

Security flags from automated reviewers (Codex, CodeRabbit, etc.) should be treated seriously and verified against the codebase.

Best Practices

Run locally first. CI validates, doesn't discover.

pnpm lint && pnpm typecheck && pnpm test && pnpm build

If CI finds bugs you didn't find locally, your local testing was insufficient.

Checklist

CI:

All checks green
Failures fixed (if any)

Review feedback:

All threads resolved
Each: evaluated → fixed/pushback → replied → resolved

Merge:

gh pr merge --squash --delete-branch
Issue marked Done
Continue to next issue

Integration

Called by: issue-driven-development, autonomous-orchestration

Follows: pr-creation

Uses: receiving-code-review (principles for evaluating feedback)

Completes: PR lifecycle

What ships with it: 2 files

5.0 KB alongside SKILL.md

reference/

ci-failures.md2.1 KB
review-feedback.md2.9 KB

Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most monitoring observability skills give in 919 tokens

Counted across 530 of the 532 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-09-06

Use structured JSON loggingin 40 of 530, across 36 files
Link every alert to a runbookin 29 of 530, across 27 files
Attach correlation IDs to every log linein 19 of 530, across 16 files
Alert on symptoms rather than causesin 19 of 530, across 17 files
Use OpenTelemetry for distributed tracingin 15 of 530, across 14 files
Alert on symptoms users feelin 15 of 530, across 13 files
Implement health check endpointsin 14 of 530, across 10 files
Inspect existing dashboards firstin 12 of 530, across 4 files
Build the minimum useful boardin 12 of 530, across 4 files
Start from operator questionsin 12 of 530, across 4 files
Propagate trace context across boundariesin 11 of 530, across 10 files
Include trace id in all log entriesin 10 of 530, across 9 files

Said here and by no other author read

Wait for CI to complete
Fix CI failures and push
Address all unresolved review threads
Merge PR when gates pass

Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.