Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

posting-review-summary

@bitwarden/ai-plugins
1
0

Posts or updates the PR summary comment. Detects context (GitHub sticky comment, GitHub new comment, or local file) and routes output accordingly. Use after all findings are classified and inline comments are posted.

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name posting-review-summary
description Posts or updates the PR summary comment. Detects context (GitHub sticky comment, GitHub new comment, or local file) and routes output accordingly. Use after all findings are classified and inline comments are posted.

Posting Review Summary

When to Use

Invoke this skill ONCE per review, AFTER all inline comments are posted. The summary MUST be scannable and brief because engineers read summaries first.

Context Detection

Context How to Detect Action
GitHub Actions mcp__github_comment__update_claude_comment available Update sticky comment
Local review Tool not available OR explicit local mode Write to review-summary.md

FORBIDDEN: Do not use gh pr comment to create summary comments.

PR Metadata Assessment

If PR title, description, or test plan is genuinely deficient, add as ❓ finding in the Code Review Details collapsible section.

Rules

  • DO NOT comment on minor improvements
  • DO NOT comment on adequate-but-imperfect metadata
  • NEVER add as an inline comment
  • DO NOT exceed 3 lines of feedback on the PR Metadata Assessment

Examples

Genuinely deficient means:

  • Title is literally "fix bug", "update", "changes", or single word
  • Description is empty or just "See Jira"
  • UI changes with zero screenshots
  • No test plan AND changes are testable

Adequate (DO NOT flag):

  • Title describes the change even if imperfect: "Fix login issue for SSO users"
  • Description exists and explains the change, even briefly
  • Test plan references Jira task with testing details

Format

- ❓ **QUESTION**: PR title could be more specific
  - Suggested: "Fix null check in UserService.getProfile"

Summary Format

**Overall Assessment:** APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES

[1-2 neutral sentence describing what was reviewed]

<details>
<summary>Code Review Details</summary>

[Findings grouped by severity - see ordering below]

[Optional PR Metadata Assessment - only for truly deficient metadata]

</details>

Findings in Details Section

Ordering: Group findings by severity in this exact order:

  1. ❌ CRITICAL (first)
  2. ⚠️ IMPORTANT
  3. ♻️ DEBT
  4. 🎨 SUGGESTED
  5. ❓ QUESTION

Omit empty categories entirely.

Format per finding:

- [emoji] **[SEVERITY]**: [One-line description]
  - `filename.ts:42`

Example:

<details>
<summary>Code Review Details</summary>

- ❌ **CRITICAL**: SQL injection in user query builder
  - `src/auth/queries.ts:87`
- ⚠️ **IMPORTANT**: Missing null check on optional config
  - `src/config/loader.ts:23`

</details>

Output Execution

GitHub Actions:

Use mcp__github_comment__update_claude_comment to update the sticky comment with the summary.

Local:

Write summary to review-summary.md in working directory.